Hausfeld

All articles about Hausfeld.

The UK's Competition Appeal Tribunal has certified the collective claim filed by UK consumer champion Which? against Qualcomm for over £480 million. The claim is on behalf of a class of millions of UK consumers and alleges that Qualcomm abused its dominance in the markets for smartphone chipsets and standard essential patents, leading to higher smartphone prices for consumers. Augusta Ventures is backing the claim. Hausfeld is acting for the class representative.
The UK's Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) ruled last week that the collective action, FX Claim UK, brought by Phillip Evans, can be certified. However, it said this should be done on an opt-in basis only, rather than the opt-out basis on which the action had been filed – a ruling which Evans and his legal advisers Hausfeld intend to appeal. The claim is on behalf of investors damaged by the unlawful rigging of foreign exchange markets between 2007 and 2013. Bench Walk Advisors is backing the claim. 
Six leading laws firms have joined forces to establish a collective redress association for claimant practitioners and stakeholders in the group litigation sector. UK group litigation firms Edwin Coe, Hausfeld & Co, Keller Lenkner UK, Leigh Day, Milberg London, and PGMBM have founded CORLA, the Collective Redress Lawyers Association. CORLA is urging law firms, lawyers, barristers and others involved in collective redress nationwide to apply to become members and join CORLA in its drive for change.
Two major representative actions over alleged data breaches have been discontinued in the wake of last year’s Supreme Court ruling in Lloyd v Google. The YouTube data breach claim that sought damages of up to £2.5bn, was one of the cases discontinued, and was advised by Hausfeld and backed by funder Vannin Capital. The other case discontinued was one brought by Mishcon de Reya on behalf of approximately 1.6 million people whose confidential medical records were obtained by Google and DeepMind Technologies in breach of data protection laws.
Paul Taylor, Iona McCall and Gordon Stevenson of AlixPartners question whether the concerns about tie-ups between law firms and funders are truly justified, drawing on a recent panel discussion in which senior executives from Hausfeld, Willkie Farr and Harbour argued that concerns around independence, conflicts of interest and a potential restriction of choice for those seeking funding do not tally with reality.
Lesley Hannah, Kio Gwilliam and Sofie Edwards of Hausfeld share that recently, in separate proceedings, both Apple and Google have lost in quick succession early bids to access sensitive information relating to the funding of the collective actions which allege abuses of dominance in relation to their respective app stores and argue that, in determining these issues, the Tribunal has struck the correct balance between the need for transparency in collective proceedings whilst also affording proposed class representatives with the necessary level of confidentiality in respect of their funding arrangements so as not to prejudice their prospects of success.
Fortress is backing potential collective actions against both Apple and Google in the Netherlands over the restrictive conditions imposed by the tech giants that oblige developers to offer apps and in-app purchases exclusively through the app stores and charge an excessive commission. The claims are being brought by App Stores Claims Foundation. Hausfeld is acting for the foundation in bringing the claims.
UK-based Augusta Ventures has promoted Simon Latham to Head of Competition. He provides non-recourse finance for both plaintiffs and law firms in the UK and across the the EU and leads the competition and antitrust disputes team. Simon’s been recognized by Who’s Who Legal Thought Leaders: Third-Party Funding 2020, as “a well-known name in litigation funding, where he stands out for his adept handling of high-value competition disputes and group action proceedings.”
Woodsford is backing a collective claim against Govia Thameslink Railway that was filed on Wednesday 24th November with London’s specialist competition court, the Competition Appeal Tribunal. The claim is estimated to be worth up to £77 million. The claim was filed by Mr Justin Gutmann, a consumer rail campaigner. He is represented by law firms Hausfeld and Charles Lyndon and barristers from Monckton Chambers.
Vannin Capital is backing a claim filed by Hausfeld in the Competition Appeal Tribunal against Google on behalf of an estimated 19.5 million eligible UK users of smartphones and tablets running on Google’s Android operating system. The claim alleges that Google unfairly restricts consumers from accessing potential competition from other app distributors, by requiring smartphone manufacturers to pre-install a bundle of Google’s proprietary apps and services including the Google Play Store as well as imposing other contractual and technical restrictions. Estimated damages run up to £920 million.
Hausfeld LLP has scored a contingency fee contract so potentially lucrative that it includes a stipulation that the firm can’t take more than $55 million in fees. District of Columbia Attorney General Karl Racine has chosen the firm to file an antitrust lawsuit against Amazon for allegedly keeping third-party sellers on the site from offering their products elsewhere for lower prices, ensuring that they’d be sold on Amazon and the company could keep a percentage.

Before You Go

Never miss a thing in the litigation finance market.