Mastercard Incorporated & Ors v Walter Hugh Merricks

Mastercard Incorporated & Ors v Walter Hugh Merricks

The CAT's discretion to specify the domicile date is not limited to the date of the CPO; it may specify an earlier date, such as the date of the Claim Form, provided it acts in accordance with the overall statutory purpose of facilitating access to justice. The CAT did not err in law or principle in specifying the Claim Form date as the domicile date, as this approach was consistent with the statutory regime and avoided unjust exclusion of claimants.

Parties
Appellants: Mastercard Incorporated, Mastercard International Incorporated, Mastercard Europe SA; Respondent: Walter Hugh Merricks CBE
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
29 November 2022
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From the Competition Appeal Tribunal to the Court of Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Collective Proceedings, Domicile Date, Opt In/opt Out Class Actions, Jurisdiction, Limitation of Actions
Competition Law Civil Procedure Collective Proceedings Domicile Date Opt In/opt Out Class Actions Jurisdiction Limitation of Actions

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 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mastercard Incorporated, Mastercard International Incorporated, Mastercard Europe SA

Appellants

Walter Hugh Merricks CBE

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From the Competition Appeal Tribunal to the Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 What is the correct approach to determining the 'domicile date' in collective proceedings under the Competition Act 1998?
  2. 2 Did the Competition Appeal Tribunal err in law or principle in specifying the domicile date as the date of the Claim Form rather than the date of the Collective Proceedings Order (CPO)?

Ratio Decidendi

The CAT's discretion to specify the domicile date is not limited to the date of the CPO; it may specify an earlier date, such as the date of the Claim Form, provided it acts in accordance with the overall statutory purpose of facilitating access to justice. The CAT did not err in law or principle in specifying the Claim Form date as the domicile date, as this approach was consistent with the statutory regime and avoided unjust exclusion of claimants.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed.