header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
19 January 2018 / Chris Owen
Issue: 7777 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice
printer mail-detail

Opt-out still alive despite early setbacks

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.
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

Read All
Sponsored by
Carey Olsen—Patrick Ormond

Carey Olsen—Patrick Ormond

Partner joinscorporate and finance practice in British Virgin Islands

Dawson Cornwell—Naomi Angell

Dawson Cornwell—Naomi Angell

Firm strengthens children department with adoption and surrogacy expert

Penningtons Manches Cooper—Graham Green

Penningtons Manches Cooper—Graham Green

Media and technology expert joins employment team as partner in Cambridge

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Divorce ‘nuclear weapon’ freezes assets but entangles outsiders
Freezing orders in divorce proceedings can unexpectedly ensnare third parties and disrupt businesses. In NLJ this week, Lucy James of Trowers & Hamlins explains how these orders—dubbed a ‘nuclear weapon’—preserve assets but can extend far beyond spouses to companies and business partners 
NLJ this week: What counts as ‘rent’? Court says labour alone won’t do
A Court of Appeal ruling has clarified that ‘rent’ must be monetary—excluding tenants paid in labour from statutory protection. In this week's NLJ, James Naylor explains Garraway v Phillips, where a tenant worked two days a week instead of paying rent
Your magistrates’ court needs you!
Thousands more magistrates are to be recruited, under a major shake-up to speed up and expand the hiring process
NLJ this week: Freed but failed—justice system leaves the innocent empty-handed
Three men wrongly imprisoned for a combined 77 years have been released—yet received ‘not a penny’ in compensation, exposing deep flaws in the justice system. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Jon Robins reports on Justin Plummer, Oliver Campbell and Peter Sullivan, whose convictions collapsed amid discredited forensics, ‘oppressive’ police interviews and unreliable ‘cell confessions’
NLJ this week: Clarity on whistleblowing, settlements and tribunal limits
A quiet month for employment cases still delivers key legal clarifications. In his latest Employment Law Brief for NLJ, Ian Smith reports that whistleblowing protection remains intact even where disclosures are partly self-serving, provided the worker reasonably believes they serve the ‘public interest’ 
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll