Original article ISPreview UK:Read More
A self-proclaimed “consumer rights litigant“, Marc John, claims to have notified the UK’s Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) of his plan to launch a £2bn opt-out collective proceedings claim against Sky UK (Comcast). The claim appears to focus on Sky’s alleged failure to issue end-of-contract notifications (ECNs) to millions of its satellite TV customers.
The proposed case relates to a long-running legal dispute between Ofcom and Sky, which started in 2022 after the regulator ruled that the TV provider had broken consumer protection rules by failing to send End-of-Contract Notifications (ECN) to their satellite-based Pay TV customers.
Sky has spent the past few years arguing that this is incorrect because their related pay-TV services are “content services“ and NOT an “electronic communication service“, which in theory would make it an exception to Ofcom’s rules. But the Court of Appeal (Civil Division) recently dismissed Sky’s latest attempt to overturn the regulator’s decision (here).
Marc John (54), a former Odeon Cinemas executive who claims to be the same individual that made global headlines in 2018 by winning a High Court battle against Lucasfilm (here), contends that this situation has kept millions of customers paying higher “rollover” prices after their contracts ended, while also reducing their ability to switch and harming competition. But it’s unclear precisely how he’s arrived at the £2bn figure.
Marc John said:
“With the Court of Appeal judgment now public, the time feels right to make this announcement. I don’t think it matters if Sky appeals again. I’m alleging abuse of dominance, which goes beyond Ofcom’s regulatory decision. I hope to seek compensation for millions of Sky customers.”
At present this is said to be a “prospective claim“, which has yet to be certified by the CAT, with a CPO application not yet filed, and with liability and damages yet to be determined. Suffice to say, there’s nothing all that official behind the claim yet from the CAT, which for now means that it should probably be taken with a pinch of salt until we see some real movement.
The proposed claim appears to also be trying to adopt a litigant-in-person (LiP) approach, with John acting as the Proposed Class Representative (PCR) without third-party litigation funding, although he states that “adverse costs protection is not currently a concern“. But this is where things might get a bit more complicated.
John claims to have notified the CAT of his intention to use a single-purpose limited company, requiring its permission to self-represent a corporate body under CAT Guide sections 9.39 and 9.42, before making a formal application for a collective proceedings order. John says he has had discussions with interested law firms and funders, but the claim is said to be “not funder-dependent“.
Marc John explained:
“Usually, opt-out claims are engineered by lawyers who recruit academics to act as class representatives on a fee-paid basis, with litigation funding agreements covering massive legal budgets. I think those costs are wildly disproportionate and put consumer interest at risk. These claims should be genuine grassroots consumer-led initiatives.
I believe this claim, if certified, will mark the first time an opt-out claim has been developed by a consumer advocate rather than by lawyers pursuing a commercial opportunity.”
John said that he doesn’t rule out pro bono schemes or other assistance, but hopes to set a precedent by showing that defendants can be held accountable in a more accessible, efficient, and proportionate way. “The CAT would need to approve any recompense I would seek from a successful outcome as the class representative,” said John. “And would ensure it is just and reasonable.”
Opt-out claims mean the people affected are automatically included unless they opt-out. The claim, says Marc, costs them nothing and, if successful, compensation would be shared among the class, with people notified about how to claim their money. John states that he plans to innovate by using AI agents to answer class member queries, but we’re not going to go into that until we see this moving forward in a more official capacity.
The approach is an unusual one, to say the least, and it’s probably fair to say that class action claims against UK consumer telecoms and media companies haven’t recently been delivering much success (here). ISPreview has contacted the CAT for confirmation of the new notification and asked Sky to comment. But for now, it remains to be seen whether this will become anything more credible than a single press release.
