Ruling of the Tribunal which addresses:
- What, if any, provision should be made in the class definition for companies which had been dissolved but might be restored to the register;
- Whether claims by the second and further lessees of used trucks should fall within the extended run-off period for used trucks; and
- Whether the arrangements put in place by the RHA satisfy the requirements directed by the Court of Appeal in relation to the conflict of interest between claims for new and for used trucks.
In relation to (1), the Tribunal noted that the statutory scheme of the Companies Act 2006 limits the time within which an application may be made to restore a dissolved company. The statutory scheme under the Competition Appeal Tribunal Rules 2015 (“CAT Rules”) prescribes the time within which an application may be made to opt-in to the proceedings. If a previously dissolved company is not restored by 31 December 2024, it will not be able to opt-in by the specified date and will have to apply to the Tribunal for permission to opt-in. The question whether to grant such permission will then be determined in accordance with rule 82(3), and the defendants will have the opportunity to make representations as to why such permission should not be granted.
As regards (2), the Tribunal considered that the question of how to treat leases of trucks for the purpose of any run-off period was not argued before the Tribunal in the hearing which led to the judgment issued on 8 June 2022: [2022] CAT 25 (“Trucks Collective – CAT”), nor did the Tribunal give it any consideration. Accordingly, this question was now open before the Tribunal.
The Tribunal held that in the light of the expert evidence, it would be appropriate for claims for leases other than the first lease of a new truck to be included in the used truck sub-class, irrespective of when the truck was purchased by the lessor, and therefore those claims are subject to the longer run-off period i.e. to 31 January 2015.
Finally, as to (3), the Tribunal concluded that in all the circumstances, having regard to the terms of the two Litigation Funding Agreements and the involvement of separate funding vehicles, it was satisfied that the steps taken by the third party funder, Therium, as developed and set out in the fourth witness statement of Mr Purslow and buttressed by the personal undertakings from two relevant individuals sent to the Tribunal, were sufficient and adequate to address potential conflicts as regards funding.
The Tribunal resolved to authorise RHA Used Trucks Ltd pursuant to rule 78(4) of the CAT Rules as the sub-class representative for the sub-class of claimants seeking damages in respect of purchases and leases of used trucks. The Tribunal explained that it will therefore make a Collective Proceedings Order in favour of the Road Haulage Association as the class representative in this case.
