News & Events

‘One of the super-sets’, Brick Court Chambers is ‘an all-round strong’ set with ‘a large selection of high-quality competition law specialists’, ‘top commercial counsel’, ‘an excellent chambers for banking litigation’, and a ‘go-to’ set for public administrative law.

The clerks’ room ‘sets the benchmark’ for other sets with its ‘friendly, knowledgeable, and hardworking’ clerks.

"An outstanding commercial set with a track record of excellence across its core areas of work."

"A set that is singled out for its "first-rate" clerking and "client service-oriented, commercial approach."

Don’t go changing: CAT declines to force amendment to terms of collective settlement

11/11/25

Gutmann v. Stagecoach South Western Trains Ltd [2025] CAT 72

As reported in previous news items here and here, SSWT’s settlement of the “boundary fares” collective proceedings brought against them was approved by the Competition Appeal Tribunal in May 2024; at a subsequent hearing in September 2025, the Tribunal considered whether, in light of the very low take-up of the award (less than 1% of the sum available), an additional sum should be paid to the Access to Justice Foundation.

As previously noted, the Access to Justice Foundation was given permission to intervene in the hearing.

At the September 2025 hearing, SSWT indicated that it was content for the funds to be applied for this purpose and the CAT indicated that it would endorse that agreement. The CAT has now given judgment ([2025] CAT 72, available here) setting out its reasoning, and also dealing with the various disputes between “stakeholders” (i.e. the lawyers, funders and insurers behind the claim) regarding the payment of costs, fees and disbursements.

An interesting feature of the judgment is the CAT’s treatment of a suggestion from the funders that the settlement agreement should be retrospectively amended to provide for SSWT to bear half of the cost of the payment to charity from its own pocket. This was rejected at [74] on the basis that “it would be unfair at this stage to, in effect, rewrite the Settlement Agreement against the interests of SSWT”. The Tribunal did not consider (or need to consider) whether it would have had the power to force any such amendment on a non-consenting party 18 months after the settlement terms had been approved.

At [77], the Tribunal recorded that “such a payment can be achieved by the Stakeholders undertaking to the Tribunal to make such a payment”. Since SSWT was content for some of the settlement sum to be paid to the Access to Justice Foundation, the Tribunal also did not need to consider whether, absent such agreement, it would have had the power to require such a payment for a purpose not specified in the approved settlement terms.

Sarah Abram KC acted for SSWT throughout these proceedings, instructed by Dentons.

Gerard Rothschild acted for the Access to Justice Foundation, pro bono.

All members of Brick Court Chambers are self employed barristers. Any views expressed are those of the individual barristers and not of Brick Court Chambers as a whole.