header-logo header-logo

01 October 2015
Issue: 7670 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

“Sea change” for competition law

The UK Consumer Rights Act came into force this week, consolidating existing consumer legislation and giving consumers and small businesses new powers to bring collective actions.

Under the Act, opt-out collective actions can be brought in the Competition Appeal Tribunal against companies for breach of competition law—“a significant sea change,” according to Mark Simpson, antitrust and competition partner at Norton Rose Fulbright.

The opt-out mechanism means claims can be brought by a group of litigants without the need to identify all the claimants individually. The opt-out aspect applies to UK consumers and businesses only, but foreign claimants can “opt in” to the claim if they wish to join.

Simpson says: “The first cases are likely to be cases where a clear group of consumers have been harmed by blatant anticompetitive conduct, such as a cartel or abuse of a dominant position that the competition authorities have already identified.

“Despite what is often thought, such straightforward cases do not arise that often as it will not always be clear whether an infringement of the legal rules caused loss to consumers, and it is a difficult and complex exercise to calculate and prove that loss in a court. The most significant implication for corporates is that the new opt-out regime in the UK opens a new front for class actions for antitrust actions, in addition to the well-known battlegrounds in the US and Canada.”

Issue: 7670 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Kennedys—Milan Devani

Kennedys—Milan Devani

Chief information officer appointment strengthens technology leadership

Maguire Family Law—Hannah Barlow & Sophie Hughes

Maguire Family Law—Hannah Barlow & Sophie Hughes

Firm strengthens Wilmslow team with two solicitor appointments

DWF—Ian Plumley

DWF—Ian Plumley

Londoninsurance and reinsurance practice announces partner appointment

NEWS
The Supreme Court has delivered a decisive ruling on termination under the JCT Design & Build form. Writing in NLJ this week, Andrew Singer KC and Jonathan Ward, of Kings Chambers, analyse Providence Building Services v Hexagon Housing Association [2026] UKSC 1, which restores the first-instance decision and curbs contractors’ termination rights for repeated late payment
Secondments, disciplinary procedures and appeal chaos all feature in a quartet of recent rulings. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, examines how established principles are being tested in modern disputes
The AI revolution is no longer a distant murmur—it’s at the client’s desk. Writing in NLJ this week, Peter Ambrose, CEO of The Partnership and Legalito, warns that the ‘AI chickens’ have ‘come home to roost’, transforming not just legal practice but the lawyer–client relationship itself
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
back-to-top-scroll