Phones 4U Ltd v EE Ltd & Ors [2025] EWCA Civ 869 (11 July 2025)

Phones 4U Ltd v EE Ltd & Ors [2025] EWCA Civ 869 (11 July 2025)

The appeal was dismissed because the evidence did not establish the existence of a concerted practice or agreement between the respondents to exit Phones 4U from the market. The trial judge's findings, based on extensive documentary and witness evidence, showed that each MNO made independent commercial decisions driven by their own strategic interests, and that alleged contacts or exchanges were too vague or lacked the necessary consensus and causal effect to amount to a 'by object' infringement under Article 101(1) TFEU or section 2 of the Competition Act 1998.

Citation
[2025] EWCA Civ 869
Parties
Claimant/appellant: Phones 4U Limited (in administration); First Defendant/respondent: EE Limited; Second Defendant/respondent: Deutsche Telekom AG; Third Defendant/respondent: Orange SA; Fourth Defendant/respondent: Vodafone Limited; Fifth Defendant/respondent: Vodafone Group Public Limited Company; Sixth Defendant/respondent: Telefonica UK Limited; Seventh Defendant/respondent: Telefónica, S. A.; Eighth Defendant/respondent: Telefonica O2 Holdings Limited; Intervener: Competition and Markets Authority
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 July 2025
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court Judgment ([2023] EWHC 2826 (ch)), Permission to Appeal Granted on Six Grounds
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Concerted Practices, Article 101 TFEU, Section 2 Competition Act 1998, Anticompetitive Agreements, By Object Infringement, Indirect Distribution, Mobile Telecommunications, Evidence Assessment
Competition Law Commercial Law Concerted Practices Article 101 TFEU Section 2 Competition Act 1998 Anticompetitive Agreements By Object Infringement Indirect Distribution +2 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 4 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Phones 4U Limited (in administration)

Claimant/appellant

EE Limited

First Defendant/respondent

Deutsche Telekom AG

Second Defendant/respondent

Orange SA

Third Defendant/respondent

Vodafone Limited

Fourth Defendant/respondent

Vodafone Group Public Limited Company

Fifth Defendant/respondent

Telefonica UK Limited

Sixth Defendant/respondent

Telefónica, S. A.

Seventh Defendant/respondent

Telefonica O2 Holdings Limited

Eighth Defendant/respondent

Competition and Markets Authority

Intervener

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court Judgment ([2023] EWHC 2826 (ch)), Permission to Appeal Granted on Six Grounds

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the respondents engaged in a concerted practice contrary to Article 101(1) TFEU and/or section 2 Competition Act 1998 by colluding to exit Phones 4U from indirect distribution channels
  2. 2 Whether the alleged conduct constituted a 'by object' restriction of competition
  3. 3 Whether there was sufficient evidence of concertation, consensus, and causal effect between the respondents

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was dismissed because the evidence did not establish the existence of a concerted practice or agreement between the respondents to exit Phones 4U from the market. The trial judge's findings, based on extensive documentary and witness evidence, showed that each MNO made independent commercial decisions driven by their own strategic interests, and that alleged contacts or exchanges were too vague or lacked the necessary consensus and causal effect to amount to a 'by object' infringement under Article 101(1) TFEU or section 2 of the Competition Act 1998.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed in full.
  • No order for damages or further relief.