9 July 2020
Disputes Quick Read – 91 of 101 Insights
On 17 June 2020, the Supreme Court handed down its judgment in the long-running Visa and Mastercard proceedings (Sainsbury’s Supermarkets Ltd v Visa Europe Services LLC and others; Sainsbury’s Supermarkets Ltd and others v Mastercard Incorporated and others [2020] UKSC 24). Here, the Court unanimously upheld the Court of Appeal's ruling that the setting of default multilateral interchange fees – card processing fees which have to be paid by retailers – by Visa and Mastercard was a restriction of competition.
The Court of Appeal judgment related to three separate sets of proceedings in which the Competition Appeal Tribunal and the High Court had taken different approaches to the question of infringement of competition law. The Supreme Court judgment provides welcome clarity on this point.
The Supreme Court also clarified the so-called "broad axe issue", which related to the degree of precision required in the quantification of pass-on (the extent to which the claimant has mitigated its loss by passing on some or all of any overcharge in card processing fees to its customers).
The Supreme Court held that the law does not require unreasonable precision, and insofar as the Court of Appeal required a greater degree of precision in the quantification of pass-on from Visa and Mastercard than from the retailers, it had erred. The burden is therefore not on the defendant to show the exact amount of loss that the claimant has mitigated in order to reduce any damages claimed from it.
Overall, the Supreme Court judgment is a resounding success for retailers where establishing liability is concerned. However, it does not resolve the issue of quantum, and hurdles remain for retailers to quantify their damages claims, which may be the subject of future hearings (unless settlements can be negotiated).
30 January 2025
22 January 2025
by Multiple authors
6 December 2024
14 November 2024
14 November 2024
by Emma Allen
30 October 2024
by Multiple authors
15 October 2024
21 March 2024
by Emma Allen, Amy Cheng
14 December 2023
13 December 2023
23 October 2023
by Multiple authors
17 October 2023
12 September 2023
by Tom Charnley
14 August 2023
by Multiple authors
4 August 2023
by Multiple authors
21 July 2023
10 July 2023
1 June 2023
by Multiple authors
3 May 2023
by James Bryden
20 April 2023
by James Bryden
8 March 2023
2 March 2023
14 February 2023
13 February 2023
8 February 2023
19 January 2023
3 October 2022
22 September 2022
by Ben Jones, Emma Allen
9 August 2022
by Nick Maday
25 July 2022
6 July 2022
by Emma Allen
Welcome news for those pursuing fraud claims in the English Courts
28 July 2022
27 July 2022
by Stuart Broom
29 July 2022
17 June 2022
13 June 2022
26 May 2022
31 May 2022
by Multiple authors
4 April 2022
5 April 2022
31 March 2022
by Multiple authors
21 September 2021
by Multiple authors
13 September 2021
6 September 2021
2 August 2021
21 July 2021
15 July 2021
by Jess Thomas
26 May 2021
5 May 2021
21 April 2021
31 March 2021
26 February 2021
by Tim Strong
24 February 2021
20 January 2021
12 January 2021
by Tim Strong
23 November 2020
16 October 2020
23 September 2020
7 October 2020
by Nick Storrs
9 April 2020
by Multiple authors
15 April 2020
27 April 2020
by Multiple authors
21 April 2020
11 March 2020
by James Bryden
17 March 2020
by Stuart Broom
26 February 2020
21 February 2020
2 June 2020
16 June 2020
9 July 2020
21 July 2020
3 December 2021
24 November 2021
by Stuart Broom
8 October 2021
10 January 2022
20 January 2022
22 March 2022
7 April 2022
by multiple authors