Brick Court Chambers

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 Legal 500 2020
The clerks’ room ‘sets the benchmark’ for other sets with its ‘friendly, knowledgeable, and hardworking’ clerks.
The Legal 500 2020
"An outstanding commercial set with a track record of excellence across its core areas of work."
Chambers & Partners 2018
"A set that is singled out for its "first-rate" clerking and "client service-oriented, commercial approach."

Salmon certification claim slips through the net

15/04/26

The Competition Appeal Tribunal has today handed down judgment in Waterside Class Limited v Mowi ASA & Ors [2026] CAT 32, declining at this stage to make a collective proceedings order in proposed opt-out competition proceedings concerning Atlantic salmon, while inviting a further application on a revised basis. 

The proposed claim was brought on behalf of UK consumers who purchased salmon from retailers. It is alleged that six major Norwegian and Scottish producers of Atlantic Salmon unlawfully colluded between April 2013 and February 2019 to increase the price of Atlantic Salmon, with those increased costs said to have been passed on, in whole or in part, to consumers. The Proposed Defendants deny unlawful collusion. 

The Tribunal held that the claim was “not currently suitable for a CPO” on the material before it. Its principal concern was that there was insufficient evidence to support an expectation that the amount likely to be returned to the class would be proportionate to, or exceed, the proposed costs of the claim. 

The Tribunal also concluded that the Proposed Class Representative had not, at this stage, adequately addressed that costs-benefit question in her evidence, and was therefore not prepared to authorise it as class representative on the present application. 

The Tribunal did not finally reject the claim. It held that there was, in principle, a case for consumers to be represented in opt-out proceedings alongside the related Asda and Tesco retailer claims, and invited a revised application, supported by a substantially reduced budget and a more effective distribution mechanism. 

The judgment will be of wider interest in collective proceedings, in particular for its treatment of certification, proportionality and distribution. It underlines the Tribunal’s close scrutiny of whether proposed proceedings are likely to deliver a meaningful return to the class, while leaving open the possibility that a reformulated consumer claim may yet swim upstream. 

The judgment can be read here.

Sarah Abram KC and Camilla Cockerill appeared for the Proposed Class Representative, instructed by Simmons & Simmons LLP. 

Sarah Ford KC and Emma Mockford appeared for the Proposed Defendants, instructed by Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom (UK) LLP; Freshfields LLP; Schjødt LLP; Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton LLP; and Shepherd and Wedderburn LLP. 

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.