header-logo header-logo

Law digests: 25 July 2025

25 July 2025
Issue: 8126 / Categories: Case law , In Court , Law digest
printer mail-detail

Competition

Christine Riefa Class Representative Ltd v Apple Inc and others [2025] CAT 34

The Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) ruled on costs following its earlier decision to refuse an application by Christine Riefa Class Representative Ltd (the PCR) for a collective proceedings order in a case involving multiple proposed defendants from the Apple and Amazon groups. The CAT determined that Apple and Amazon, being successful in their defence, are entitled to recover reasonable costs linked to the unsuccessful certification application by the PCR. The CAT also held that Amazon was required to remit reasonable costs incurred by the PCR in responding to Amazon’s unsuccessful disclosure application. The CAT ruled that costs incurred in preparing substantive defences, utilised for the certification application, should be recoverable and not reserved for potential future proceedings. The CAT adjusted solicitor and expert fees to align them with proportionality and guideline hourly rates, awarding interim payments on account of costs at 65% of the revised total costs claimed by the respective parties.


Conflict of laws

Al Saady v Al-Hamadani and others [2025] EWHC 1801 (Ch)

The

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

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Corporate governance and company law specialist joins the team

Excello Law—Heather Horsewood & Darren Barwick

Excello Law—Heather Horsewood & Darren Barwick

North west team expands with senior private client and property hires

Ward Hadaway—Paul Wigham

Ward Hadaway—Paul Wigham

Firm boosts corporate team in Newcastle to support high-growth technology businesses

NEWS

NOTICE UNDER THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925

HERBERT SMITH STAFF PENSION SCHEME (THE “SCHEME”)

NOTICE TO CREDITORS AND BENEFICIARIES UNDER SECTION 27 OF THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925
Law firm HFW is offering clients lawyers on call for dawn raids, sanctions issues and other regulatory emergencies
From gender-critical speech to notice periods and incapability dismissals, employment law continues to turn on fine distinctions. In his latest employment law brief for NLJ, Ian Smith of Norwich Law School reviews a cluster of recent decisions, led by Bailey v Stonewall, where the Court of Appeal clarified the limits of third-party liability under the Equality Act
Non-molestation orders are meant to be the frontline defence against domestic abuse, yet their enforcement often falls short. Writing in NLJ this week, Jeni Kavanagh, Jessica Mortimer and Oliver Kavanagh analyse why the criminalisation of breach has failed to deliver consistent protection
Assisted dying remains one of the most fraught fault lines in English law, where compassion and criminal liability sit uncomfortably close. Writing in NLJ this week, Julie Gowland and Barny Croft of Birketts examine how acts motivated by care—booking travel, completing paperwork, or offering emotional support—can still fall within the wide reach of the Suicide Act 1961
back-to-top-scroll