Last year the UK’s Competition and Markets Authority found Compare The Market depended on wide most favoured nation clauses to obtain the cheapest prices from home insurers, preventing them from offering cheaper rates on rival price comparison websites. The proposed class action claims that the anticompetitive clauses meant home insurance consumers paid higher prices for policies.
Competition law partner Sophie Lawrance shared her thoughts with GCR in that the case depicts the “appetite” for collective actions and this kind of action is showing “no signs of abating”. She said that even if the CAT dismisses Compare The Market’s appeal, the claimants will have a number of challenges when it comes to evaluating the effects of the conduct on consumers. For example, as the claim extends to umbrella effects across the whole industry, will this be difficult to quantify?