The On-Amazon claim can proceed if funding and remuneration arrangements are amended.
The Competition Appeal Tribunal has partly certified an Apple Amazon claim brought on behalf of consumers who purchased Apple products in the UK, allowing the On-Amazon part of the proposed collective action to proceed subject to changes to its funding arrangements and the proposed class representative’s remuneration. The Tribunal refused to certify the separate Off-Amazon claim.
JLP A&A Class Representative Limited alleges that Apple and Amazon entered into agreements in 2018 that unlawfully restricted competition in the sale and advertising of Apple products on Amazon’s UK Marketplace. It says the arrangements reduced the number of Apple resellers able to operate on the marketplace and resulted in higher prices.
The proposed class covers natural persons who purchased Apple or Beats-branded products at retail level in the UK between 31 October 2018 and 15 December 2025. The proposed class representative estimated the class at around 28.9 million people.
The Tribunal considered whether the proposed economic methodologies met the Microsoft test, which requires a methodology to offer a realistic prospect of establishing loss on a class-wide basis, be grounded in the facts of the particular case and have some evidential basis for the availability of the necessary data.
The Tribunal said Dr Chris Pike’s expert evidence should be treated with caution but did not disregard it entirely. It found that the methodology supporting the On-Amazon claim was sufficiently credible and grounded in the available evidence to satisfy the Microsoft test. The Off-Amazon methodology, however, was insufficiently coherent and developed to meet that threshold. The Off-Amazon claim was therefore not certified, although it was not struck out or summarily dismissed.
The Tribunal also examined how any damages might be distributed. It considered the proposed direct-credit mechanism, under which Apple and Amazon data could be used to identify eligible consumers and make payments or account credits, to be credible and practical for the On-Amazon claim. It was less persuaded by the proposed online application process for consumers who could not be identified through the direct-credit system.
On costs, the Tribunal concluded that the likely benefits of continuing the On-Amazon claim outweighed the likely costs, provided changes were made to the funding and remuneration arrangements.
The Tribunal required arrangements allowing recovery of costs connected with the earlier Riefa proceedings to be removed before a collective proceedings order is made. It also ruled that Justin Le Patourel’s future remuneration should be limited to £170 per hour, subject to a daily cap of £750.
The Tribunal concluded that, if those changes are made, it would be just and reasonable to authorise JLP A&A Class Representative Limited and certify the On-Amazon claim on an opt-out basis. Permission will also be granted to amend the claim to include injunctive relief if the proceedings are certified. The judgment was unanimous.