Professor Carolyn Roberts v Severn Trent Water Limited & Severn Trent Plc & Ors

Professor Carolyn Roberts v Severn Trent Water Limited & Severn Trent Plc & Ors

The Court of Appeal (majority) held that Professor Roberts's claim for abuse of dominance was barred by section 18(8) WIA because the alleged abuse—misleading Ofwat by under-reporting pollution incidents—depended on the existence and breach of the statutory reporting obligation, making the contravention of licence conditions an essential ingredient of the claim. The claim could not be established independently of the regulatory regime, and thus section 18(8) excluded the remedy sought.

Parties
Proposed Class Representative/appellant: Professor Carolyn Roberts; Proposed Defendants/respondents: Severn Trent Water Limited & Severn Trent PLC; Proposed Defendants/respondents: United Utilities Water Limited & United Utilities Group PLC; Proposed Defendants/respondents: Yorkshire Water Services Limited & Kelda Holdings Limited; Proposed Defendants/respondents: Northumbrian Water Limited & Northumbrian Water Group Limited; Proposed Defendants/respondents: Anglian Water Services Limited & Anglian Water Group Limited; Proposed Defendants/respondents: Thames Water Utilities Limited & Kemble Water Holdings Limited; Intervener: The Water Services Regulatory Authority (Ofwat)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
03 May 2026
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal (competition/regulatory) / Appeal From Competition Tribunal to Court of Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed (majority); claim barred by section 18(8) WIA.
Legal Topics
Abuse of Dominant Position, Collective Proceedings, Statutory Interpretation, Price Regulation, Remedies Under Competition Act, Water Industry Regulation
Competition Law Regulatory Law Consumer Protection Abuse of Dominant Position Collective Proceedings Statutory Interpretation Price Regulation Remedies Under Competition Act +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Professor Carolyn Roberts

Proposed Class Representative/appellant

Severn Trent Water Limited & Severn Trent PLC

Proposed Defendants/respondents

United Utilities Water Limited & United Utilities Group PLC

Proposed Defendants/respondents

Yorkshire Water Services Limited & Kelda Holdings Limited

Proposed Defendants/respondents

Northumbrian Water Limited & Northumbrian Water Group Limited

Proposed Defendants/respondents

Anglian Water Services Limited & Anglian Water Group Limited

Proposed Defendants/respondents

Thames Water Utilities Limited & Kemble Water Holdings Limited

Proposed Defendants/respondents

The Water Services Regulatory Authority (Ofwat)

Intervener

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal (competition/regulatory) / Appeal From Competition Tribunal to Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether section 18(8) of the Water Industry Act 1991 bars collective abuse of dominance claims under the Competition Act 1998 against water companies for misleading Ofwat and causing consumer overcharging.
  2. 2 Whether the alleged abuse (misleading Ofwat) is actionable independently of a contravention of licence conditions.

Ratio Decidendi

The Court of Appeal (majority) held that Professor Roberts's claim for abuse of dominance was barred by section 18(8) WIA because the alleged abuse—misleading Ofwat by under-reporting pollution incidents—depended on the existence and breach of the statutory reporting obligation, making the contravention of licence conditions an essential ingredient of the claim. The claim could not be established independently of the regulatory regime, and thus section 18(8) excluded the remedy sought.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed (majority); claim barred by section 18(8) WIA.

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed.
  • No Collective Proceedings Order is to be made under section 47B(4) of the Competition Act 1998.