Key Takeaway: Distribution, funding, and jurisdictional nuances dominated discussions at quarter one events, reflecting the evolving United Kingdom collective actions landscape relative to Europe. There is growing pressure on the UK regime to deliver on take-up rates. As opt-out cases expand across Europe and scrutiny from the Competition Appeal Tribunal intensifies, participants across the ecosystem face mounting expectations to adapt or risk falling behind.

A wide range of stakeholders attended the events, including class representatives, defendants, administrators, funders, and public relations professionals. These gatherings offered the opportunity to test ideas, share perspectives from across the ecosystem, and gauge the appetite for more innovative approaches to delivering on class member engagement.

Events and Discussion Points

Take-Up Rates

A recurring theme of discussions across quarter one events, particularly the Cambridge Forum: UK Litigation and Mass Claims at Pennyhill and the ThoughtLeaders4 UK Competition Litigation Circle, was industry leaders’ growing focus on distribution outcomes. Scrutiny is intensifying on take-up rate performance, which is considered an important benchmark to judge whether the regime is meeting the expectations set by the Competition Appeal Tribunal. Recent debate has, however, highlighted that take-up rates, while significant, can assess success only partially. As the UK regime is still developing, expectations should be adjusted accordingly. There is broad agreement that improving take-up rates can be achieved by taking a more holistic approach across the ecosystem, rather than leaving it to claims administrators alone.

Representative Actions Across Europe

The ThoughtLeaders4 European Funding Litigation Circle in Chantilly offered insights into how the Representative Actions Directive (RAD) is being implemented across Europe. Jurisdictions are required to introduce opt-out mechanisms into their domestic legislation, but each is doing so within its existing legal and procedural framework. This has led to significant variation in practice in how collective actions are developing across Europe. For example, in certain jurisdictions, pre-appointed court-linked bodies traditionally make litigation payments.  A hot topic is whether these entities are equipped to manage large-scale, high-volume distributions.

The RAD is being implemented at widely differing rates across Europe. Spain, for example, is progressing conservatively: opt-in regimes here remain the primary focus while opt-out mechanisms continue to develop. Specific legal constraints elsewhere shape how claims can be brought and managed. Claimants in France must be onboarded directly by lawyers rather than third parties; in the Netherlands, electronic signature requirements differ from UK style clickwrap agreement processes.

There is a growing appetite among funders to invest in European volume litigation. Owing to the absence of a single European model, effective administration will hinge on a deep understanding of jurisdiction specific legal requirements. 

Litigation Funding as a Critical Enabler

The ThoughtLeaders4 Irish Competition Law Forum has reinforced the view that opt-out regimes can operate effectively only if professional litigation funding is available. In Ireland, litigation funding remains prohibited, which significantly limits the practical use of the RAD despite its formal implementation. To date, only one opt-out claim, brought by a public regulatory body and self funded, has been filed.

Without access to funding, opt-out cases are, as a practical matter, difficult to run in Ireland. There is no immediate prospect of reform in this area. Discussions have highlighted the central role funding plays in determining whether collective actions can operate as intended.

Consumer Protection and the Digital Markets Act

The GCR: Live: Consumer Protection event, hosted by Global Competition Review, brought together regulators, including Ofgem and the Competition and Market Authority (CMA). Insights were offered into the Digital Markets Act (DMA) and its implications for consumer protection in digital environments. While it does not directly govern opt-in or opt-out collective actions, the DMA reinforces a broader principle: claimants are consumers, so interactions with them throughout class action claims, including during distributions, must reflect evolving expectations around fairness, transparency, and protection.

Environmental, Social, and Governance: On the Horizon, Not Yet Mainstream

The fourth annual ThoughtLeaders4 ESG Litigation Summit 2026 highlighted that mass claims in this area remain at an early stage and have yet to gain significant traction in the UK. ESG related litigation in the shareholder dispute space has not surged quite as expected, largely owing to ongoing legal uncertainty around what investors must prove when relying on ESG disclosures. Nonetheless, as increasing regulatory scrutiny and developments in international case law suggest, this may change; claims could potentially rise once these uncertainties are clarified.

Cases and Developments To Watch

Looking ahead to the next quarter, several developments are emerging as focal points for the collective actions landscape. The outcome of the collective proceedings order (CPO) hearing in Waterside Limited’s collective action against six salmon producers will be closely followed, particularly for the scrutiny placed on the proposed notice and administration plan and the role of the claims administrator. Such issues directly relate to concerns around take-up rates and effective distribution.

The progression of other high profile competition claims are also being watched, including Apple’s application to appeal the ruling in the claim brought by Kent. This is a case affecting millions of UK users; it raises broader questions about accountability and market power in the technology sector. Merricks v Mastercard remains a significant case as far as funder returns are concerned. Events continue to play a critical role not just in tracking judgments, but in understanding industry reaction as these decisions land.

Learn more about Epiq Class Action and Mass Tort Services.


Clare Ducksbury, Senior Vice President, Class Action Solutions, Europe

Clare’s skills and experience lend themselves to the successful, efficient, and cost-effective notice and administration of collective actions. Over the course of more than 25 years, Clare has been instrumental in outreach programs and distribution in various high-profile cases. Clare co-founded Case Pilots in 2017 and served as its CEO for eight years until Epiq acquired the leading UK claims administration company in July 2025.

Clare is a subject matter expert and frequent speaker on topics including global class actions and technology-powered litigation distribution.