header-logo header-logo

07 December 2022
Issue: 8006 / Categories: Legal News , Collective action , Competition
printer mail-detail

Mastercard loses latest appeal against opt-out class action

Mastercard has lost its latest appeal against the Competition Appeals Tribunal (CAT) decision to certify an ‘opt-out’ class action.

The Court of Appeal’s unanimous dismissal means about three million people who died between September 2016 when the claim was filed and August 2021 when the CAT certified the claim will be succeeded by representatives of their estate. Individuals who have died since August 2021 will also be succeeded, but this was not an issue in the appeal.

The pioneering billion-pound class action is being brought by personal finance campaigner Walter Merricks over multilateral interchange fees charged by Mastercard.

Boris Bronfentrinker, partner at Willkie Farr & Gallagher, representing Merricks, said the judgment in Mastercard v Merricks [2022] EWCA Civ 1568 ‘finally brings to an end the battle to get the collective proceedings certified, a battle that started over six years ago. The scope of the class represented by Mr Merricks is now settled’.

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

20 promotions mark major people investment at national law firm, Anthony Collins

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley adds competition litigator Elaine Whiteford in London

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys welcomes Claudina D’Costa as Director of Client Development Marketing

NEWS
The 25th Pro Bono Week begins today until 6 November, with events hosted by law firms, chambers, law schools and charities across the UK
Pro bono is celebrating a silver anniversary, with initiatives putting businesses and students at the heart of access to justice
Choosing the wrong expert can cost a clinical negligence claimant more than their case
Judges risk weakening their own independence by staying silent over government reforms, a leading public lawyer argues
A discount on damages does not automatically mean an equivalent haircut for legal costs in military deafness claims
back-to-top-scroll