header-logo header-logo

19 January 2018 / Chris Owen
Issue: 7777 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice
printer mail-detail

Opt-out still alive despite early setbacks

nlj_7777_owen

It’s been one problem after another so far, but Chris Owen remains optimistic about the future for collective redress

  • The Consumer Rights Act 2015 introduced opt-out class actions for competition claims.
  • Initial optimism wavered as the first cases hit the stumbling blocks. But the CAT has shown willingness to accept these claims in principle, meaning there is hope for funders and claimant representatives alike.
  • It is only a matter of time before a large-scale class claim gets out of the gates.

The Consumer Rights Act 2015 heralded a new era for collective redress in the UK for competition infringements, introducing an opt-out class action regime for competition damages claims. Although opt-out actions have existed in the US for many years, this was the first of its kind within the UK (and indeed a first across the whole of Europe).

It marked a major step forward from what had gone before. The preceding opt-in regime, in which claimants had to self-select to join the litigation, had proved a damp squib (only

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

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Dual-qualified partner joins as head of commercial property department

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Firm announces appointment of next chair

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Director joins corporate team from the US

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll