Various Claimants v Serco Group Plc [2023] EWHC 119 (Ch) (26 January 2023)

Various Claimants v Serco Group Plc [2023] EWHC 119 (Ch) (26 January 2023)

Developments since the first CMC do not justify abandoning the sampling approach for indirect reliance claims or expanding the sample group as proposed by the defendant. The existing sample is sufficiently representative, and increasing the cohort would be disproportionate and inefficient. The court approves the sample group as proposed by the claimants.

Citation
[2023] EWHC 119 (Ch)
Parties
Claimants: Various Claimants; Defendant: Serco Group Plc
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
26 January 2023
Procedural Posture
Financial List (ch) Securities Litigation / Case Management Conference (cmc) Ruling on Sample Selection for Split Trial
Outcome
Application to expand the sample group refused; sample group approved as proposed by claimants.
Legal Topics
Section 90 a FSMA 2000, Schedule 10 a FSMA 2000, Reliance (direct, Market, Price), Sampling in Group Litigation, Limitation (section 32 Limitation Act 1980)
Financial Services Law Securities Litigation Civil Procedure Section 90 a FSMA 2000 Schedule 10 a FSMA 2000 Reliance (direct, Market, Price) Sampling in Group Litigation Limitation (section 32 Limitation Act 1980)

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 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Various Claimants

Claimants

Serco Group Plc

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Financial List (ch) Securities Litigation / Case Management Conference (cmc) Ruling on Sample Selection for Split Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether all indirect reliance claimants should be included in trial two or a sampling approach should be maintained
  2. 2 Whether additional claimants with specific reliance or investment characteristics should be added to the sample group

Ratio Decidendi

Developments since the first CMC do not justify abandoning the sampling approach for indirect reliance claims or expanding the sample group as proposed by the defendant. The existing sample is sufficiently representative, and increasing the cohort would be disproportionate and inefficient. The court approves the sample group as proposed by the claimants.

Court Disposition

Application to expand the sample group refused; sample group approved as proposed by claimants.

Orders

  • Sample group for trial two approved as MC2, MC3, MC4, MC9, MC12, MC13, and MC22-23, including their listed funds or accounts.
  • Defendant's application to include all indirect reliance claimants or additional specific claimants in the sample is refused.