RECENT DEVELOPMENTS IN CLASS AND COLLECTIVE COMPETITION CLAIMS IN THE US AND UK

By Victoria L. Weatherford and Rachel H. Ofori¹

Collective competition litigation² continues to evolve around the world, presenting novel issues for both claimants and defendants. Collective competition actions play a key role in the overall enforcement of antitrust claims due to their ability to combine many small claims, which otherwise would have been impossible or otherwise too costly to litigate individually. Collective actions also promote judicial economy and protect against conflicting judgments. In the United States, antitrust class actions are a well-established, commonly used litigation mechanism that allows multiple plaintiffs to jointly litigate antitrust claims. In the U.K., the Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) or the Tribunal has been in existence for only 20 years, and class or collective action proceedings for antitrust and competition claims have been generally litigated in the UK for fewer than 10 years.

Throughout the years, collective antitrust actions have addressed a wide range of harms caused by antitrust violations, ranging from monopolistic schemes and price-fixing to anticompetitive actions and market manipulation. These cases have resulted in significant settlements which have continued to increase over recent years, reflecting their importance in deterring anti-competitive behavior and compensating affected parties.

In this article, we highlight the key similarities and differences between the antitrust collective redress regimes in the U.S. and in the U.K., as the first collective action competition cases reach settlement and trials are expected to proceed in the UK in the coming years. We will discuss the current meaningful differences in class certification procedures, scope of discovery, litigation funding, settlement, and damages considerations.