Wirral Council as Administering Authority of Merseyside Pension Fund v Indivior PLC [2023] EWHC 3114 (Comm) (05 December 2023)

Wirral Council as Administering Authority of Merseyside Pension Fund v Indivior PLC [2023] EWHC 3114 (Comm) (05 December 2023)

The court held that, although the 'same interest' requirement for representative proceedings was satisfied, the overriding objective required the court to retain control over case management, including bifurcation and progression of individual issues. Representative proceedings in this context would predetermine procedural structure in claimants' favour, depriving the court of necessary flexibility and balance. As ordinary multi-party proceedings were available and preferable for effective case management, the court exercised its discretion to strike out the representative proceedings under CPR 19.8(2).

Citation
[2023] EWHC 3114 (Comm)
Parties
Representative Claimant: Wirral Council as administering authority of Merseyside Pension Fund; Defendant: Indivior PLC; Defendant: Reckitt Benckiser Group PLC
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
05 December 2023
Procedural Posture
Representative Proceedings (financial List, Commercial Court) / Application to Strike Out Representative Proceedings Under CPR 19.8(2) and (3)
Outcome
Representative proceedings struck out; claimants must proceed by ordinary multi-party proceedings.
Legal Topics
Representative Actions, Case Management, Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 (fsma), Collective Redress, Bifurcation of Proceedings
Civil Procedure Securities Law Representative Actions Case Management Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 (fsma) Collective Redress Bifurcation of Proceedings

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 16 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Wirral Council as administering authority of Merseyside Pension Fund

Representative Claimant

Indivior PLC

Defendant

Reckitt Benckiser Group PLC

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Representative Proceedings (financial List, Commercial Court) / Application to Strike Out Representative Proceedings Under CPR 19.8(2) and (3)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether representative proceedings under CPR 19.8 are appropriate for securities claims under ss.90, 90A and Schedule 10A FSMA
  2. 2 Whether the court should exercise its discretion to allow representative proceedings to continue or strike them out in favour of ordinary multi-party proceedings
  3. 3 Whether bifurcation of common and individual issues is permissible and appropriate in this context

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that, although the 'same interest' requirement for representative proceedings was satisfied, the overriding objective required the court to retain control over case management, including bifurcation and progression of individual issues. Representative proceedings in this context would predetermine procedural structure in claimants' favour, depriving the court of necessary flexibility and balance. As ordinary multi-party proceedings were available and preferable for effective case management, the court exercised its discretion to strike out the representative proceedings under CPR 19.8(2).

Court Disposition

Representative proceedings struck out; claimants must proceed by ordinary multi-party proceedings.

Orders

  • Wirral Council may not continue as representative claimant under CPR 19.8; representative proceedings against Indivior PLC and Reckitt Benckiser Group PLC are struck out.
  • Stay on multi-party proceedings may be lifted to allow claimants to pursue claims in the ordinary way.