Innsworth faces hefty costs bill after failed settlement intervention

In a recent ruling from the Competition Appeal Tribunal, litigation funder Innsworth found itself responsible for a costs bill approaching £1 million. The judgement, handed down on 31st October 2025, held Innsworth liable for £730k, which resulted from the additional legal expenses incurred by Walter Merricks CBE and Mastercard during Innsworth’s failed effort to interrupt the £200 million consumer action settlement. The Tribunal’s judgement made clear that “Innsworth intervened to do battle on a wide front against the Settlement Application … and in that battle, it was in all material respects unsuccessful.”

The Tribunal concluded that the significant extra legal fees Mr Merricks had to shoulder while successfully resisting Innsworth's attempts should be paid by the funder. It noted that allowing these costs to be taken out of the settlement amount would unjustly diminish the compensation available for class members. Following this ruling, Innsworth is still pursuing a challenge in the Administrative Court regarding the Tribunal’s approval of a distribution that would allow UK consumers to receive £70 each. Furthermore, it continues an arbitration claim against Mr Merricks personally in a bid for more financial gain beyond what has been mandated by the Tribunal.

Despite its ongoing legal battles, Innsworth requested the Tribunal to expedite a payment of approximately £46 million. This request was firmly opposed by Walter Merricks, who argued that such a move would not serve the best interests of the UK consumers he has been advocating for. The Tribunal agreed with Merricks, denying the request for immediate payment from the settlement funds.

With the Tribunal having formally approved the consumer settlement, the process to distribute funds to UK consumers can now commence. Although Mastercard will be paying over £200 million, the distribution will remain halted until the resolution of Innsworth’s challenge in the Administrative Court. The Tribunal’s decision illustrates how it can safeguard the interests of consumers amidst ongoing debates about the effectiveness of the collective action regime in the UK.

Walter Merricks expressed his satisfaction with the ruling, stating “Friday’s ruling by the Tribunal amounts to a total vindication of all the arguments I have made since I agreed to settle my case with Mastercard nearly a year ago.” He noted that Innsworth has been stubbornly attempting to thwart the consumer settlement and expressed hope that its latest judicial review efforts would also be rejected soon. He described Innsworth's actions as shameful, highlighting how they only serve to undermine the broader interests of the funding industry, stating, “It is unfortunate that the conduct of a single litigation funder feeds much of the anti-regime statements that have been made as part of the Government’s review.”

Mr Merricks’ solicitor, Boris Bronfentrinker of Willkie Farr & Gallagher, shared similar sentiments, saying, “The Tribunal’s ruling is very satisfying. Yet again, the Tribunal has rejected all the arguments advanced by the litigation funder, Innsworth.” He underscored the problematic nature of Innsworth's approach from the outset, emphasising the necessity for funding accountability. Bronfentrinker went on to express his confidence that the Administrative Court would dismiss Innsworth’s judicial review efforts and the arbitration against Mr Merricks.

As preparations to distribute the settlement to affected consumers move forward, many hope this ruling will mark a turning point in addressing the challenges within the collective action framework and ensure that consumer redress remains a priority in future legal considerations.