Cables Case Fails to Spark Interest of Court of Appeal

10/07/26

The Court of Appeal (Green LJ, sitting alone) has refused permission to appeal from the judgment of the CAT in London Array v Nexans [2025] CAT 59. This is the latest example of the recent Court of Appeal practice of holding oral hearings leading to fully-reasoned judgments on applications for permission to appeal in competition cases, after a similar process was followed in cases like Liothyronine and Le Patourel.

London Array is one of only a handful of cartel damages claims which have so far proceeded to a judgment for damages in this jurisdiction. The Claimants were companies involved in the construction and operation of a large windfarm in the Thames estuary. The Defendants were companies within the corporate group which supplied the cables connecting the windfarm to the onshore network (known as ‘export’ cables), and had been found by the European Commission to have been parties to the power cables cartel. The CAT judgment in the case was the subject of an earlier Brick Court Chambers news piece, available here: https://www.brickcourt.co.uk/news/detail/cable-cartel-generated-overcharge-says-cat. In the judgment, a 5% overcharge level was held appropriate on the ground that part of the tender period for the cables took place after the cartel had ended.

Nexans identified four Grounds of Appeal in its application. The first was that the CAT had erred in holding that another cable supplier by the name of ABB had been party to cartel discussions with Nexans concerning the supply of cables to the London Array project, which discussions took place only after the date when ABB had applied for leniency and the Commission held that its participation in the cartel had ceased. This point did not assist Nexans, so held Green LJ, as Nexans’ participation in the cartel was still continuing as at the date of these discussions. In any event, Green LJ agreed with the CAT that the likely explanation for ABB’s having apparently continued to participate in the cartel following the date of its leniency application was that it was “playing along” with the cartel to avoid prejudicing the dawn raids (which had not yet taken place). Green LJ held that none of Nexan’s other proposed Grounds met the threshold for an appealable point of law either.

As a result of this ruling, the CAT judgment in the case has now become final.

The judgment can be found here.