ENGLAND & WALES Trends and Developments Contributed by: James Lynch, Sophie Green and Nick Connor, Maltin PR
and GBP14 billion had initially been sought, the set- tlement was significantly less than expected, valued at around GBP200 million. Following the announcement of the settlement, Innsworth Capital then brought arbi- tration against Merricks, seeking damages, as well as bringing unsuccessful arguments before the CAT that it should receive a higher proportion of the set- tlement. Continued scepticism around the size of the settlement and the financial viability of the claim has been a blow to the UK’s class action-type litigation landscape. In other cases, however, large “opt-out” litigation cases continue to dominate headlines. At the outset of 2025, there were more than 20 class actions active against Apple, Google (and Alphabet) and Meta, val- ued at more than GBP30 billion, despite uncertainty around funding arrangements. The CAT is, of course, not the only mechanism for “opt-out” class action claims in the UK; group litiga- tion cases on non-competition matters, via collective actions and group litigation orders (GLOs), continue to be a buoyant area. Courts continue to face challeng- es with case management surrounding large cases, including the use of omnibus claim forms and test cases. GLOs were once central to group litigation, but bespoke claims management approaches have now taken precedence, increasing the burden on courts. The case against five large car manufacturers relating to the so-called “dieselgate” scandal has highlighted the challenges courts face in managing large claims, with controversy just ahead of the trial relating to one of the lead claimant law firms in the dispute. The possible impact of successful group actions has also become more visible. The motor finance case over unfair discretionary commission arrangements has seen millions of consumers likely to receive an estimated GBP700 each in compensation. A Supreme Court decision in August 2025 sided with motor com- panies and limited the scope of compensation, while politicians, regulators and lenders were highly vocal about the potential impact on lenders of billion-pound redress schemes. This included a failed attempt by the Chancellor Rachel Reeves to intervene in the case. Such cases illustrate how influential success- ful opt-out group litigation can become, and highlight
the clear challenges facing courts, regulators and legislators in managing competing interests relating to historic actions by companies or entire industries. Environmental and governance litigation has also seen significant cases. The case relating to the Mariana dam collapse in Brazil in 2015, valued at up to GBP36 billion, has presented numerous challenges surround- ing how UK courts manage large-scale international litigation cases with arguable jurisdictional links, and how regulators approach the involvement of third-par- ty funders. The result of this case, currently awaiting judgment, will likely have a major impact on potentially similar litigation that other parties may consider bring- ing. Similarly, the claim against Johnson & Johnson and its subsidiary Kenvue Ltd, filed in October 2025 over allegations that the company was aware of the potential for “talc”-based baby powder to contain carcinogens, could likewise become the largest ever product liability case in English courts. Further poten- tial avenues for claims include greenwashing litiga- tion, with businesses eyeing their potential exposure to action around “green” claims made in promotion of their business, and potential liability for breaches of the Financial Services and Markets Act (FSMA). One aspect of group litigation action that remains constant, however, is the ongoing susceptibility of defendants to negative media coverage. Where media attention on the majority of litigation between corpo- rate parties will often result in negative attention for both, the claimants in group litigation have typically been seen as engaging in something of a “David ver- sus Goliath” battle. Indeed, it is increasingly rare for group litigation to launch without a comprehensive media plan, seeking to secure enough negative media coverage relating to the defendant to ensure that set- tlement discussions begin before too many legal fees are incurred. This makes it vital for those representing prospective claimants and defendants in such matters to retain expert advisers to assist in either encourag- ing or managing media attention. In short, the group litigation market remains unsettled in outlook. While major claims continue to be brought, the market slowdown following the PACCAR judg- ment has reduced the quantity of claims brought. In June 2025, the Civil Justice Council’s Working Group
302 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook