Class action meaning

On 4 July 2025, the Court of Appeal unanimously dismissed challenges by Apple, Visa, Mastercard and Sony to the validity of commonly used funding arrangements that calculate a funder’s fee or return as a multiple of their outlay or costs in class actions and class action claims, a ruling expected to lift spirits across a funding sector seriously rocked by the Supreme Court’s PACCAR judgment and its effects. Macfarlanes LLP partner Malcolm Hitching said the outcome is significant because it recognises that collective proceedings are a necessary part of the legal landscape, that consumers do need protection, and that the Competition Appeal Tribunal is there to provide that protection. He observed that, had the Court of Appeal reached the opposite view, it would have been difficult to see how a funder could actually provide funding to a collective group of claimants. Sony and others had disputed whether litigation funding agreements, amended in response to a 2023 ruling by the top court, known as PACCAR, could be enforced....

According to Steam's owner Valve Valve says that in 2023 Bucher launched a mass‑arbitration drive through his new practice, The Bucher Law Firm. As part of this push, he advised Steam users that pursuing arbitration alleging the platform monopolised the gaming market to keep prices artificially high was a better route than a class action. Valve also contends Bucher embarked on the campaign after being dismissed from Zaiger LLC and accused of taking its client list, again urging users to choose arbitration over a class action. His firm then issued a settlement demand that Valve characterises as extreme and beyond any plausible recovery, and submitted thousands of arbitration filings to the American Arbitration Association. In May, Bucher Law sought rulings in four of its cases to have the arbitration clause in the company’s former subscriber agreement declared unenforceable. Those applications were granted in July, after which Steam dropped its arbitration clause, prompting users to accept a new subscriber agreement last month...

Private actions CAT grants CPO in PC games class action The CAT has delivered its judgment in Vicki Shotbolt Class Representative v Valve Corporation, a claim for damages issued by Vicki Shotbolt Class Representative (PCR), under section 47B of the Competition Act 1998, against Valve Corporation (Valve), asserting that Valve abused its dominant position, in breach of Article 101 TFEU (up to 31 December 2020) and the Chapter II prohibition of the Competition Act 1998. Background The claim revolves around Valve’s running of Steam, a prominent digital distribution platform for PC video games, via which titles are almost exclusively supplied in digital form...

This Practice Note examines claims for damages for breach of statutory duty. For guidance on claims for damages for a negligent breach of the duty of care outside a statutory duty, see the following Practice Notes: Negligence—when does a duty of care arise? Negligence—when is the duty of care breached? —nature of liability A claimant who suffers loss or injury in circumstances where a defendant has contravened a statutory requirement may, in some cases, recover damages in tort, even if the facts do not fall within the scope of a recognised tort such as negligence. Where the statute expressly provides a right to damages, the position will generally be straightforward. In the absence of such a provision, the availability of a claim turns on Parliament’s intention, which must be identified by construing the statute in question. Because that intention is seldom explicit, the courts have developed a series of tests and presumptions, applied both to the legislative wording and to the facts...

This Resource Note summarises the key provisions in Chapter 5 of the Disclosure Guidance and Transparency Rules (DTR 5). It addresses the reporting duties of holders and issuers of interests in voting rights in an issuer whose shares are admitted to trading on a regulated or prescribed market in the United Kingdom. It signposts relevant commentary, analysis and resources to aid interpretation and provide practical guidance on applying DTR 5. Setting the scene Where relevant, the materials referenced include: the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) Handbook FCA Guidance in the FCA Knowledge Base—Procedural notes and Technical notes (which constitute formal guidance and bind the FCA) FCA consultation papers, discussion papers, policy statements, feedback statements and warnings Primary Market Bulletins and other FCA publications former UKLA technical and procedural notes and the UKLA’s newsletter List!, where still relevant to interpreting or applying a provision assimilated EU legislation EU Directives and EU Regulations, where still pertinent to construing a provision materials...

This Resource Note summarises the core provisions of Rule 21 of the City Code on Takeovers and Mergers (the Code). It covers the limits on an offeror taking frustrating action in connection with an offer, and the approach to inducement fees and other offer-related arrangements. Rule 21 also mandates that competing offerors are given equivalent information, and that the offeree’s independent directors receive all information supplied to external finance providers in a management buy-out. It signposts relevant materials, commentary and guidance from the Panel on Takeovers and Mergers (the Panel), alongside Lexis+® UK analysis and resources, to provide practical direction on the interpretation and application of Rule 21... Materials covered in this Resource Note include: Practice Statements issued by the Panel Executive (the body responsible for the day-to-day supervision and regulation of takeovers) (Executive), offering informal guidance on how the Executive typically interprets and applies the Code Panel Statements issued by the Panel (P/S) and Panel Instruments Public Consultation Papers (PCP) and Response Statements...

[ ON THE CLAIMANT’S SOLICITORS’ LETTERHEAD ] For the attention of [ RELEVANT NAME ] [ NAME OF DEFENDANT OR, IF KNOWN, DEFENDANT’S SOLICITOR ] [ ADDRESS LINE 1 ] [ ADDRESS LINE 2 ] [ POSTCODE ] [ INDICATE IF SERVED BY FIRST CLASS POST / EMAIL / HAND DELIVERY, ETC ] [ DATE ] Dear [ insert organisation name ] [ PROSPECTIVE CLAIMANT’S NAME ] AND [ PROSPECTIVE DEFENDANT’S NAME ] Letter of Claim Introduction We refer to our earlier correspondence dated [ insert date of prior correspondence sent, if any ]. As you will be aware, we act for [ insert client’s full name ], of [ insert full address ]. This correspondence constitutes our client’s letter of claim, issued in line with the Pre-Action Protocol for Personal Injury Claims (the ‘Protocol’) within the Civil Procedure Rules, and a copy is enclosed for ease of reference. Please turn to the final...

[ Alleged infringer’s name and address ] [ Date ] Dear [ insert organisation name ], [ UK trade mark registration number [ insert number ] ] We act for [ name and address of client ] (‘our client’). Our client is the proprietor of UK trade mark registration number [ number ] for [ details of trade mark—eg word or logo ], recorded in [ class OR classes ] [ class numbers ] and covering [ among other things ] [ details of specification ] (the ‘Trade Mark’). An extract from the register for the Trade Mark accompanies this letter. Importation into UK It has come to our client’s notice that you are infringing the Trade Mark through the [ importation and offer for sale ] in the UK of goods [ bearing the Trade Mark OR the packaging of which bears the Trade Mark ], which have not been placed on the market in the [ EEA OR UK ] by our...

[ Alleged infringer’s name and address ] [ Date ] Dear [ insert organisation name ] [ UK trade mark registration number [ insert number(s) ] ] We act for [ name and address of client ] ('our client'). We write concerning your conduct and activities. The trade mark(s) Our client holds UK trade mark registration number [ number ] for [ details of trade mark—eg word or logo ], registered in [ class OR classes ] [ class numbers ], covering, among other things, [ details of specification ] (the 'Trade Mark'). An extract from the register for the Trade Mark is enclosed with this letter. [ Insert name of alleged infringing company ] It has come to our client's attention that you are [ details of infringing activity ] (the 'Actions'). Please find enclosed copies of [ detail evidence of infringing actions ]. For the avoidance of doubt, our client does not consent to the Actions...