‘A group of estate agents who secretly conspired to keep their fees high to make “as much profit as possible” have been fined £370,000 for operating an illegal cartel.’
The Guardian, 18th September 2017
Source: www.theguardian.com
‘Adult social care is on the financial ropes. Last year it was the introduction of the “national living wage”, this year it’s the requirement to backdate pay for sleep-in shifts. In both cases, the government is being urged to step in to prop up care providers.’
The Guardian, 22nd August 2017
Source: www.theguardian.com
‘At first glance, two recent judgments from the CAT may give the impression that the new UK class action regime is dead in the water. However, on closer inspection there is much in these judgments that prospective claimants will welcome.
Blackstone Chambers, 7th August 2017
Source: www.blackstonechambers.com
‘In this paper, presented at the recent Blackstone Chambers Employee Competition Seminar, Kerenza Davis addresses the tricky issue of protecting confidential documents when litigating in the areas of employee competition.’
Blackstone Chambers, 19th July 2017
Source: www.employeecompetition.com
‘On 21 July, the Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) issued its decision dismissing an application for a collective proceedings order (“CPO”) in the MasterCard litigation (Walter Merricks v MasterCard Inc & ors [2017] CAT 16). It is a decision whose significance goes beyond the fact that it is a further illustration of the difficulties of advancing opt-out class actions. It remains the case that, despite nearly two years having elapsed since implementation of schedule 8 of the Consumer Rights Act 2015, no CPO has been made, nor is one likely to be made at any time soon. Whilst the decision is subject to Mr Merricks’ right of appeal, this alerter briefly considers the implications for the management of class actions. In very broad terms, the decision underlines the requirements of a high level of precision and a sound and principled evidential basis in relation to: (1) the definition of the class; (2) the calculation of aggregate class damages; (3) the means for distributing damages within the class; and (4) the elements of a funding agreement.’
Henderson Chambers, 25th July 2017
Source: www.hendersonchambers.co.uk
‘A campaigning group opposed to Rupert Murdoch’s takeover of Sky is threatening a legal challenge to the media regulator’s ruling that the broadcaster would remain “fit and proper” to hold a UK licence if it was snapped up by 21st Century Fox.’
The Guardian, 21st August 2017
Source: www.theguardian.com
‘A record-breaking £14bn collective action against Mastercard is set to rumble on after the former ombudsman who brought the case on behalf of 46 million consumers seeks to appeal last month’s Competition Appeal Tribunal ruling.’
Law Society's Gazette, 14th August 2017
Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk
‘At first glance, two recent judgments from the CAT may give the impression that the new UK class action regime is dead in the water. However, on closer inspection there is much in these judgments that prospective claimants will welcome.’
Competition Bulletin, 4th August 2017
Source: competitionbulletin.com
‘Plans to require BT to allow competing telecoms companies access to spare telecoms capacity, so that they can deliver rival broadband services to business customers, have been “quashed” by the UK’s Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT).’
OUT-LAW.com, 28th July 2017
Source: www.out-law.com
‘The House of Lords’ EU Internal Market Sub-Committee has launched an inquiry into the implications of Brexit on UK competition policy.’
OUT-LAW.com, 25th July 2017
Source: www.out-law.com
‘A record-breaking collective claim against MasterCard was thrown out by the Competition Appeal Tribunal today in a major blow to the growth of funded class actions in the UK. The case, brought by former financial services ombudsman Walter Merricks on behalf of 46 million consumers who were alleged to be victims of excess ‘interchange fees’ charged by card companies, claimed £14bn in damages. It was the largest sum claimed in English legal history.’
Law Society's Gazette, 21st July 2017
Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk
‘Supreme Court (Lords Neuberger, Mance, Clarke, Sumption and Hodge) Eli Lilly v Actavis UK Ltd and others [2017] UKSC 48 (12 July 2017)
What the Appeal was about
The pharmaceutical company Eli Lilly and Co (“Lilly”) has developed a drug called pemetrexed which it markets under the brand name Alimta for the treatment of various types of cancer. Used on its own, pemetrexed has unpleasant side effects that can sometimes be fatal but these can be avoided when it is administered as a compound called pemetrexed disodium in combination with vitamin B12.’
NIPC Law, 13th July 2017
Source: nipclaw.blogspot.co.uk
‘British pharmaceutical companies are suing the NHS’s drugs watchdog in an effort to prevent drug rationing.’
Daily Telegraph, 10th July 2017
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
‘Ex-employers need to protect their confidential information. Some of the most potent weapons in the ex-employers’ armoury are orders for preservation, return and protection of confidential information. However, two recent cases provide a warning of the dangers of making assumptions in relation to applications for that relief, and show the stringent approach taken by the courts to orders for the protection of confidential information.’
Littleton Chambers, 29th June 2017
Source: www.littletonchambers.com
‘Businesses operating in the financial services, energy or telecoms sectors are to be encouraged to report their involvement in cartels directly to the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) under proposals put forward by the regulator.’
OUT-LAW.com, 3rd July 2017
Source: www.out-law.com
‘The competition regulator is to take action against some online gambling companies which it suspects of breaking consumer law.’
BBC News, 23rd June 2017
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
‘A lighting supplier has been fined £2.7 million for requiring retailers to use a minimum price when selling its products online.’
OUT-LAW.com, 21st June 2017
Source: www.out-law.com
‘The low level of external investment in law firms since alternative business structures (ABSs) were allowed more than five years ago “may be a symptom of weak competition in the market overall”, a Legal Services Board (LSB) report has suggested.’
Legal Futures, 15th June 2017
Source: www.legalfutures.co.uk
© Inner Temple Library 2024