• Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer
  • Home
  • About
  • Gowling WLG
  • Legal information
  • Privacy statement
  • Cookie Policy
  • Home
  • About
  • Posts
  • Blogs
    • B2022
    • The IP Blog
    • Public Law & Regulation
    • AI
    • The Unified Patents Court

LoupedIn

Strong step forward for litigation funding in the class action arena

August 20, 2021, Emma Carr and Louise Macdonald

Strong step forward for litigation funding in the class action arena

Wednesday 18th August saw confirmation from court that the first consumer group class action claim in the UK – Merricks v Mastercard – could proceed to trial, on the basis that a suitable undertaking of costs liability is given by the Claimant’s new litigation funder.

The Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) confirmed that the action was suitable for collective proceedings against Mastercard, reviving a potential claim by former Financial Ombudsman, Walter Hugh Merricks CBE, on behalf of 46.2 million individuals in the UK for alleged losses spanning over 16 years. The class action will seek an estimated £15 billion of compensation for allegedly inflated prices paid by UK consumer cardholders because of unlawful default interbank fees passed on to them in the period between 1992 and 2008.

Whilst the terms of the litigation funding agreement were not challenged by Mastercard, save for one exception, the Tribunal scrutinised the litigation funding agreement in order to protect the interests of the members of the proposed class.

The CAT commented in its judgment that the anticipated costs of the action will be “vast”. With the change in litigation funder, Merricks has access to funding for his costs and disbursements of £45.1 million, in addition to £15 million for adverse costs. This is a marked increase on the previous funding agreement which was scrutinised by the CAT in earlier proceedings. A revised costs budget was produced by Merricks setting out total anticipated costs of nearly £32.5 million. This provided insight for the Tribunal to be satisfied that the new funding agreement will allow the Claimant to pursue the claim adequately for the potential class members. The Tribunal observed that even if third party disclosure proves to be extensive, any consequent budget excess would be covered and funding would be in place.

Areas of potential conflict of interest between funder and potential class members i.e. settlement of the proceedings and termination of the funding agreement, were reviewed by the Tribunal and found to be satisfactory. The Tribunal also observed that, although lengthy, the funding agreement is clearly drafted.

Not only does this judgment pave the way for the future of class actions in the UK, it is also a colossal step forward in the field of third party litigation funding and its potential to support large-scale litigation, providing access to justice for consumers and other connected groups of individuals.

About the author(s)

Photo of Emma Carr
Emma Carr
View Emma's profile |  See recent postsBlog biography

Emma has over 17 years' experience in providing timely and pragmatic advice to her clients on commercial disputes, including breach of warranty, contractual disputes, negligence claims and public procurement challenges.

  • Emma Carr
    https://loupedin.blog/author/emmacarr/
    UK Litigation Funding: reform or retain?
  • Emma Carr
    https://loupedin.blog/author/emmacarr/
    UK litigation funding: Mastercard settlement approved by court despite funder challenge
  • Emma Carr
    https://loupedin.blog/author/emmacarr/
    UK Litigation funding: Court deliberation of ‘multiple approach’ back on the timetable
  • Emma Carr
    https://loupedin.blog/author/emmacarr/
    Litigation funding – CJC issues interim report and opens consultation
Louise Macdonald
Knowledge Lawyer at Gowling WLG |  See recent postsBlog biography

Louise is a Knowledge Lawyer in the Commercial Litigation Group.

  • Louise Macdonald
    https://loupedin.blog/author/louisemacdonald/
    UK Litigation Funding: reform or retain?
  • Louise Macdonald
    https://loupedin.blog/author/louisemacdonald/
    UK litigation funding: Mastercard settlement approved by court despite funder challenge
  • Louise Macdonald
    https://loupedin.blog/author/louisemacdonald/
    UK Litigation funding: Court deliberation of ‘multiple approach’ back on the timetable
  • Louise Macdonald
    https://loupedin.blog/author/louisemacdonald/
    The ripple effect of data breaches – the importance of empathy when notifying individuals

Emma Carr and Louise Macdonald

Filed Under: News Tagged With: dispute, Dispute Resolution, litigation funding

Views expressed in this blog do not necessarily reflect those of Gowling WLG.

NOT LEGAL ADVICE. Information made available on this website in any form is for information purposes only. It is not, and should not be taken as, legal advice. You should not rely on, or take or fail to take any action based upon this information. Never disregard professional legal advice or delay in seeking legal advice because of something you have read on this website. Gowling WLG professionals will be pleased to discuss resolutions to specific legal concerns you may have.

Primary Sidebar

Recent Posts

  • UPC’s first decision concerning a second medical use patent
  • Sole(ly) aesthetic? The Birkenstock Sandal goes to the Federal Court of Justice
  • UK Litigation Funding: reform or retain?

Tags

Artificial Intelligence (AI) (62) Autonomous vehicles (11) b2022 (19) Birmingham 2022 (8) Birmingham 2022 Commonwealth Games (15) Brexit (23) Climate change (16) Collective defined contribution (6) COP26 (11) Copyright (11) COVID-19 (23) Cyber security (7) Data protection (8) Defined contribution (7) Dispute Resolution (14) Employment (14) employment law (11) Environment (18) Environmental Societal Governance (9) ESG (50) ESG and pensions (11) General Election 2024 and pensions (8) Intellectual Property (87) IP (10) Life sciences (7) litigation funding (8) net zero (6) Patents (41) Pensions (53) Pension Schemes Act 2021 (11) Pensions dashboards (7) Pensions in 2022 (10) Pensions law (43) Procurement (7) Public Law & Regulation (39) Real Estate (27) Retail (8) sustainability (21) Tech (58) The Week In Pensions (11) Trademarks (16) UK (15) unified patents court (9) UPC (40) Week in HR (8)

Categories

Archives

Gowling WLG is an international law firm comprising the members of Gowling WLG International Limited, an English Company Limited by Guarantee, and their respective affiliates. Each member and affiliate is an autonomous and independent entity. Gowling WLG International Limited promotes, facilitates and co-ordinates the activities of its members but does not itself provide services to clients. Our structure is explained in more detail on our Legal Information page.

Footer

  • Home
  • About
  • Gowling WLG
  • Legal information
  • Privacy statement
  • Cookie Policy

© 2025 Gowling WLG