Court of Appeal decision on group actions strengthens trend for American-style class actions in the UK

Posted: 18/04/2024

The Court of Appeal has today ruled that a group of investors seeking to recover losses for alleged bad advice can continue their group claim, strengthening a trend for affordable justice and American-style class actions in the UK.

David Niven, a partner in Penningtons Manches Cooper’s specialist group actions practice, represents 134 property investors in a multi-million pound professional negligence case against Williams & Co Solicitors. Today he successfully defeated an attempt to strike out the claim, in which the defendants had contended that it was not permissible for the claims to be issued in a single claim form.

He commented: “This is a significant legal victory for claimant class action teams. The Court of Appeal has ruled that any number of claimants can use a single claim form to start any and all claims, provided it would be ‘convenient’. Crucially, the court has also made it clear that convenience does not require establishing common issues of fact or law between the claims and claimants.”

This landmark judgment is a significant step forward not just for this claim, but for collective redress in the English courts. It confirms that claimants are permitted to seek access to justice in the simplest form of a group claim: a single claim form for all claimants and claims. Where claimants cannot meet the ‘common interest’ requirements of procedural alternatives such as group litigation orders and representative actions, it means that a simple, flexible and cost-effective solution will remain available. 

Class actions are on the rise in the English courts. This crucial judgment highlights the courts’ willingness to ensure that procedural complexities do not prevent access to justice in large-scale litigation.

David Niven added: “The Court of Appeal rejected any attempt to impose additional requirements on the ability to bring multiple claims in a single claim form. The court held that sufficient ‘commonality’ of issues between the claims and the claimants (an element required in other group litigation procedures) is not required. The only constraint is ‘convenience’. The question of convenience will depend on the facts of the case. While it is likely that convenience and commonality will go hand in hand, Sir Geoffrey Vos, the Master of the Rolls, made it clear this is not currently a requirement under the court rules. To ensure greater clarity on this point, he also suggested a review of the rules on group actions might be welcome.”

He concluded: “This judgment will be of significant assistance to claimants and litigation funders alike, who are expected to review existing potential claims and revisit their analysis on the feasibility of bringing class actions.”

Return to news headlines