Paccar Inc & Ors v Road Haulage Association Ltd & Ors

Paccar Inc & Ors v Road Haulage Association Ltd & Ors

Third-party litigation funding agreements that provide for remuneration as a share of damages, but do not involve the funder in the management of the claim, are not 'damages-based agreements' under section 58AA of the Courts and Legal Services Act 1990 as defined by section 4(2) of the Compensation Act 2006. The Court of Appeal lacks jurisdiction to hear an appeal from the Competition Appeal Tribunal's decision on this issue under section 49 of the Competition Act 1998, as the decision is not 'as to the award of damages' within the statutory meaning.

Parties
Appellant/claimant: PACCAR INC; Appellant/claimant: DAF TRUCKS N.V.; Appellant/claimant: DAF TRUCKS DEUTSCHLAND GMBH; Respondent/interested Party: ROAD HAULAGE ASSOCIATION LIMITED (RHA); Respondent/interested Party: UK TRUCKS CLAIM LIMITED (UKTC); Defendant: THE COMPETITION APPEAL TRIBUNAL; Interested Party: MAN SE; Interested Party: MAN TRUCKS AND BUS AG; Interested Party: MAN TRUCKS AND BUS DEUTSCHLAND GMBH; Interested Party: FIAT CHRYSLER AUTOMOBILES N.V.; Interested Party: CNH INDUSTRIAL N.V.; Interested Party: IVECO S.P.A; Interested Party: IVECO MAGIRUS AG; Interested Party: VOLVO LASTVAGNER AKTIEBOLAG; Interested Party: DAIMLER AG; Intervener: THE ASSOCIATION OF LITIGATION FUNDERS OF ENGLAND & WALES (ALF)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
05 March 2021
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review and Application for Permission to Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment on Jurisdiction and Substantive Judicial Review
Outcome
Application for permission to appeal dismissed for lack of jurisdiction; permission to apply for judicial review granted on ground 1 but claim dismissed on the merits; permission for judicial review refused on ground 2.
Legal Topics
Litigation Funding, Damages Based Agreements, Collective Proceedings, Statutory Interpretation
Competition Law Civil Procedure Access to Justice Litigation Funding Damages Based Agreements Collective Proceedings Statutory Interpretation

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 19 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

PACCAR INC

Appellant/claimant

DAF TRUCKS N.V.

Appellant/claimant

DAF TRUCKS DEUTSCHLAND GMBH

Appellant/claimant

ROAD HAULAGE ASSOCIATION LIMITED (RHA)

Respondent/interested Party

UK TRUCKS CLAIM LIMITED (UKTC)

Respondent/interested Party

THE COMPETITION APPEAL TRIBUNAL

Defendant

MAN SE

Interested Party

MAN TRUCKS AND BUS AG

Interested Party

MAN TRUCKS AND BUS DEUTSCHLAND GMBH

Interested Party

FIAT CHRYSLER AUTOMOBILES N.V.

Interested Party

CNH INDUSTRIAL N.V.

Interested Party

IVECO S.P.A

Interested Party

IVECO MAGIRUS AG

Interested Party

VOLVO LASTVAGNER AKTIEBOLAG

Interested Party

DAIMLER AG

Interested Party

THE ASSOCIATION OF LITIGATION FUNDERS OF ENGLAND & WALES (ALF)

Intervener

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review and Application for Permission to Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment on Jurisdiction and Substantive Judicial Review

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether third-party litigation funding agreements providing for remuneration as a share of damages are 'damages-based agreements' under section 58AA of the Courts and Legal Services Act 1990 as defined by section 4(2) of the Compensation Act 2006
  2. 2 Whether the Court of Appeal has jurisdiction to hear an appeal from the Competition Appeal Tribunal's decision on this issue under section 49 of the Competition Act 1998

Ratio Decidendi

Third-party litigation funding agreements that provide for remuneration as a share of damages, but do not involve the funder in the management of the claim, are not 'damages-based agreements' under section 58AA of the Courts and Legal Services Act 1990 as defined by section 4(2) of the Compensation Act 2006. The Court of Appeal lacks jurisdiction to hear an appeal from the Competition Appeal Tribunal's decision on this issue under section 49 of the Competition Act 1998, as the decision is not 'as to the award of damages' within the statutory meaning.

Court Disposition

Application for permission to appeal dismissed for lack of jurisdiction; permission to apply for judicial review granted on ground 1 but claim dismissed on the merits; permission for judicial review refused on ground 2.

Orders

  • No permission to appeal to the Court of Appeal.
  • Permission to apply for judicial review on ground 1 granted but claim dismissed.