Evans v Barclays Bank Plc and others

Evans v Barclays Bank Plc and others

The Tribunal was entitled to treat the weakness of the claim as a strong factor against opt-out proceedings and to find that opt-in proceedings were practicable for large claimants. The Court of Appeal erred in interfering with the Tribunal's evaluative judgment and in relying on the Sterling Lads decision, which was inadmissible and irrelevant. The Tribunal's refusal to certify opt-out proceedings is reinstated.

Parties
Respondent: Phillip Evans; Appellants: Barclays Bank Plc and others
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
18 December 2025
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal (competition/collective Proceedings) / Supreme Court Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
Appeal allowed; Tribunal's refusal to certify opt-out proceedings reinstated.
Legal Topics
Collective Proceedings, Opt in Vs Opt Out Class Actions, Strike Out Applications, Follow on Damages, Case Management Discretion
Competition Law Civil Procedure Collective Proceedings Opt in Vs Opt Out Class Actions Strike Out Applications Follow on Damages Case Management Discretion

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 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 9
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Phillip Evans

Respondent

Barclays Bank Plc and others

Appellants

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal (competition/collective Proceedings) / Supreme Court Judgment on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Tribunal erred in treating the weakness of the claim as a factor against opt-out proceedings
  2. 2 Whether the Tribunal erred in its assessment of the practicability of opt-in proceedings
  3. 3 Whether policy goals of facilitating vindication of rights and deterrence favour opt-out proceedings

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal was entitled to treat the weakness of the claim as a strong factor against opt-out proceedings and to find that opt-in proceedings were practicable for large claimants. The Court of Appeal erred in interfering with the Tribunal's evaluative judgment and in relying on the Sterling Lads decision, which was inadmissible and irrelevant. The Tribunal's refusal to certify opt-out proceedings is reinstated.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; Tribunal's refusal to certify opt-out proceedings reinstated.

Orders

  • The Court of Appeal's order is set aside.
  • The Tribunal's decision refusing opt-out collective proceedings is reinstated.