header-logo header-logo

01 May 2015 / Tobias Caspary , James Kitching , Leigh Mallon
Issue: 7650 / Categories: Features , Competition
printer mail-detail

A new frontier

nlj_may_1_mallon

Leigh Mallon, James Kitching & Tobias Caspary explore opt-out “class-actions” for competition law damages actions in the UK

In recent years there have been a number of legislative and regulatory changes aimed at simplifying the process by which those who suffer loss as a result of competition law breaches can obtain compensation. The latest amendments to the Competition Act 1998 (CA 1998), via the Consumer Rights Act 2015 (CRA 2015), were passed in the last weeks of the most recent UK Parliament. The changes, which are expected to come into force on 1 October 2015, include:

  • increasing the types of competition law cases that the Competition Appeals Tribunal (CAT) hears; and
  • introducing a right to bring opt-out collective actions and to enter into opt-out collective settlements for infringements of competition rules.

These changes are likely to result in a significant increase in the number and type of competition-based damages claims brought in the UK with a corresponding increase in the likelihood that businesses will find themselves as claimants or

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

Ken Fowlie, chairman of Stowe Family Law, reflects on more than 30 years in legal services after ‘falling into law’

Gardner Leader—Michelle Morgan & Catherine Morris

Gardner Leader—Michelle Morgan & Catherine Morris

Regional law firm expands employment team with partner and senior associate hires

Freeths—Carly Harwood & Tom Newton

Freeths—Carly Harwood & Tom Newton

Nottinghamtrusts, estates and tax team welcomes two senior associates

NEWS
Children can claim for ‘lost years’ damages in personal injury cases, the Supreme Court has held in a landmark judgment
The cab-rank rule remains a bulwark of the rule of law, yet lawyers are increasingly judged by their clients’ causes. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian McDougall, president of the LexisNexis Rule of Law Foundation, warns that conflating representation with endorsement is a ‘clear and present danger’
Holiday lets may promise easy returns, but restrictive covenants can swiftly scupper plans. Writing in NLJ this week, Andrew Francis of Serle Court recounts how covenants limiting use to a ‘private dwelling house’ or ‘private residence’ have repeatedly defeated short-term letting schemes
Artificial intelligence (AI) is already embedded in the civil courts, but regulation lags behind practice. Writing in NLJ this week, Ben Roe of Baker McKenzie charts a landscape where AI assists with transcription, case management and document handling, yet raises acute concerns over evidence, advocacy and even judgment-writing
The Supreme Court has drawn a firm line under branding creativity in regulated markets. In Dairy UK Ltd v Oatly AB, it ruled that Oatly’s ‘post-milk generation’ trade mark unlawfully deployed a protected dairy designation. In NLJ this week, Asima Rana of DWF explains that the court prioritised ‘regulatory clarity over creative branding choices’, holding that ‘designation’ extends beyond product names to marketing slogans
back-to-top-scroll