Shorter Reads

UK Court of Appeal widens the door for “opt out” class actions

Head of Dispute Resolution Services Robin Henry comments on the Court of Appeal’s decision on FX Claim UK.

1 minute read

Published 26 July 2023

Authors

Share

Key information

  • Sectors
  • Financial services

The Court of Appeal’s judgment in Evans v Barclays [2023] EWCA Civ 876 on 25 July 2023 has given the go ahead for FX manipulation class actions on an “opt out” basis. This paves the way for opt out claims to be made in future by businesses as well as consumers.

This is a very significant judgment, with the Court providing strong support not only for those claiming compensation for FX manipulation by banks but also for the development of UK class actions generally. This represents a substantial step forward in opening the door for US style opt out competition law class actions.

The case concerned Phillip Evans and Michael O’Higgins as competing class representatives for claims of FX manipulation against Barclays and other banks. In giving the go ahead for the claims to be on an opt out basis, the Court reversed the 2022 decision of the Competition Appeal Tribunal (the “CAT”). The practical effect of the decision in allowing an opt-out rather than an opt-in procedure is that instead of the claims likely failing because not enough claimants will sign up to them, they will now have the critical mass to proceed, with claimants benefiting from a successful outcome, even if they have not taken active steps to participate in the litigation.

Although in the Mastercard v Merricks case (UKSC 2019/0118), the Supreme Court previously approved an opt out basis for competition claims, that involved claims by consumers who would never have been able to bring litigation proceedings individually.  In the case of Evans and O’Higgins v Barclays, the CAT decided that an opt in basis was more appropriate where the class members were likely to be sophisticated litigants (even when there was evidence that an opt in basis would still not attract sufficient support to be viable). The Court of Appeal disagreed with the CAT’s view, holding that since an opt in procedure was not viable, an opt out procedure was preferable in the interests of access to justice for the thousands of business claimants who have aggregate claims of £2.7 billion.

For more information, visit our Banking & Financial disputes page.

Related latest updates
PREV NEXT

Related content

Arrow Back to Insights

Shorter Reads

UK Court of Appeal widens the door for “opt out” class actions

Head of Dispute Resolution Services Robin Henry comments on the Court of Appeal’s decision on FX Claim UK.

Published 26 July 2023

Associated sectors / services

  • Banking & financial disputes
  • Financial services

Authors

The Court of Appeal’s judgment in Evans v Barclays [2023] EWCA Civ 876 on 25 July 2023 has given the go ahead for FX manipulation class actions on an “opt out” basis. This paves the way for opt out claims to be made in future by businesses as well as consumers.

This is a very significant judgment, with the Court providing strong support not only for those claiming compensation for FX manipulation by banks but also for the development of UK class actions generally. This represents a substantial step forward in opening the door for US style opt out competition law class actions.

The case concerned Phillip Evans and Michael O’Higgins as competing class representatives for claims of FX manipulation against Barclays and other banks. In giving the go ahead for the claims to be on an opt out basis, the Court reversed the 2022 decision of the Competition Appeal Tribunal (the “CAT”). The practical effect of the decision in allowing an opt-out rather than an opt-in procedure is that instead of the claims likely failing because not enough claimants will sign up to them, they will now have the critical mass to proceed, with claimants benefiting from a successful outcome, even if they have not taken active steps to participate in the litigation.

Although in the Mastercard v Merricks case (UKSC 2019/0118), the Supreme Court previously approved an opt out basis for competition claims, that involved claims by consumers who would never have been able to bring litigation proceedings individually.  In the case of Evans and O’Higgins v Barclays, the CAT decided that an opt in basis was more appropriate where the class members were likely to be sophisticated litigants (even when there was evidence that an opt in basis would still not attract sufficient support to be viable). The Court of Appeal disagreed with the CAT’s view, holding that since an opt in procedure was not viable, an opt out procedure was preferable in the interests of access to justice for the thousands of business claimants who have aggregate claims of £2.7 billion.

For more information, visit our Banking & Financial disputes page.

Associated sectors / services

  • Banking & financial disputes
  • Financial services

Authors

Need some more information? Make an enquiry below.

    Subscribe

    Please add your details and your areas of interest below

    Specialist sectors:

    Legal services:

    Other information:

    Jurisdictions of interest to you (other than UK):



    Article contributor

    Enjoy reading our articles? why not subscribe to notifications so you’ll never miss one?

    Subscribe to our articles

    Message us on WhatsApp (calling not available)

    Please note that Collyer Bristow provides this service during office hours for general information and enquiries only and that no legal or other professional advice will be provided over the WhatsApp platform. Please also note that if you choose to use this platform your personal data is likely to be processed outside the UK and EEA, including in the US. Appropriate legal or other professional opinion should be taken before taking or omitting to take any action in respect of any specific problem. Collyer Bristow LLP accepts no liability for any loss or damage which may arise from reliance on information provided. All information will be deleted immediately upon completion of a conversation.

    I accept Close

    Close
    Scroll up

    Find out about Business

    Find out about Dispute Resolution

    Find out about Individuals & Families

    Find out about Real Estate

    We are Collyer Bristow - The law firm for those that
    value individuality, creativity and collaboration.

    Legal & Pricing info Regulatory InformationAccessibilitySitemapPricing and service information

    Listen to our latest podcast: BHS Judgment #2 – Trading Misfeasance

    Listen to our latest podcast: BHS Judgment #1 – Wrongful trading

    Read our latest article: Sexual Harassment & the risk of relying on workplace ‘banter’ to defend a claim

    Listen to our latest podcast: No notice, no claim? (Drax v Scottish Power)

    Read our latest article: Election 2024: Domicile, Inheritance Tax, and change promised by the new Labour government

    ExpandNeed some help?Toggle

    < Back to menu

    I have an issue and need your help

    Scroll to see our A-Z list of expertise

    Get in touch

    Get in touch using our form below.



      Business Close
      Private Wealth Close
      Hot Topics Close