CAT adopts approach to damages advanced by RBB expert, leading to damages award of less than 0.2% of the claim

RBB was instructed to assist PayPoint (an energy prepayment services provider in Great Britain) during the trial stage of its litigation with GLOBAL-365 (also a payment services provider).  The matter concerned a standalone competition damages claim by GLOBAL-365 that it had been excluded from the energy prepayment services market and had therefore suffered loss as a result of PayPoint’s alleged anti-competitive behaviour (and in particular, exclusivity clauses in PayPoint’s contracts). 

Adrian MajumdarAdrian MajumdarPartner gave concurrent expert evidence and was cross-examined on topics including market definition, dominance, competitive effects of the alleged exclusionary behaviour, and the appropriate counterfactual.  When assessing the damages arising from the loss of chance, the Tribunal favoured Dr Majumdar’s “Conservative Alternative Scenario”, rejecting the approach of GLOBAL-365’s expert economist.  This led to an award of £0.17m before interest, less than 0.2% of the £113.2m originally claimed.  Adrian worked alongside an RBB team including Jacob MullerJacob MullerPrincipal, George SnaithGeorge SnaithAssociate Principal and Jane RosenbergJane RosenbergAssociate Principal.

The judgment provides an illustration of the importance of robust counterfactual analysis in competition damages cases, particularly where damages are advanced on a loss-of-chance basis.

RBB was instructed on behalf of PayPoint by Cooley LLP.