The Competition Appeal Tribunal has reserved judgment following a two-day hearing into the £1.5bn legal action against Rightmove, leaving around 13,000 estate agency and property businesses awaiting a decision on whether they will be automatically included in the claim.
The hearing, held on 2 and 3 November, focused on whether the proposed collective action should proceed on an opt-out basis or require businesses to register individually. Rightmove has challenged the opt-out approach, arguing that affected businesses are identifiable and capable of deciding whether to participate.
Rightmove's compromise proposal
The portal has also proposed a compromise under which businesses that spent more than £1m with Rightmove during the claim period would have to opt in. However, Rightmove has not applied to strike out the £1.5bn claim, which alleges that the portal abused its dominant market position by charging excessive and unfair subscription fees and restricting competition.
Rightmove strongly denies the allegations, describing the claim as “without merit” and insisting it will defend the proceedings vigorously.
Newman challenges Rightmove's position
Following the hearing, proposed class representative Jeremy Newman argued that requiring thousands of agents to sign up individually would make it harder for smaller businesses to pursue compensation. He said: “Rightmove has not tried to strike out these claims. Instead, its focus is on how the case goes ahead, not whether it should.
“Rightmove wants thousands of small and medium-sized businesses to sign up one by one, which they know is costlier, riskier and more burdensome.”
Newman added: “We remain confident that opt-out is the most realistic path to redress for the businesses impacted by Rightmove’s unfair fees.” The claim covers subscription fees paid between 1 April 2020 and 1 April 2026.
Tribunal questions practicality of opt-in claim
According to Newman’s legal team, the Tribunal questioned how approximately 13,000 businesses could realistically be contacted and encouraged to participate in an opt-in action. The Tribunal reportedly described the exercise as a “significant task”.
Kieron Beal KC, representing Newman, argued that participation would involve considerably more than simply registering interest. He said businesses could face demands for information, disclosure and witness evidence, while previous collective actions suggested that significant numbers of potential claimants could drop out.
Newman’s representatives also highlighted exchanges during the hearing concerning the economic analysis supporting the claim. They said Rightmove had accepted that the claims were “coherent”, while the Tribunal observed that there was “evidence beyond coherence”. These exchanges do not amount to a finding that the allegations against Rightmove are established.
Rightmove maintains opposition
Rightmove has also raised objections concerning aspects of the proposed damages methodology, compound interest calculations and litigation funding arrangements. The portal has questioned the potential return available to litigation funder Innsworth, along with aspects of the proposed class representative’s remuneration and funding arrangements.
Rightmove maintains that agents should be able to decide for themselves whether to participate in the proceedings. A spokesperson previously told EYE: “This claim is without merit, and we will defend it vigorously.”
What happens next?
The Tribunal has reserved judgment and has not confirmed when its decision will be delivered. The ruling will address whether the collective proceedings can be certified and, if so, the basis on which eligible businesses can participate. It will also consider whether Newman should be authorised to represent the proposed claimant group.
The decision will not determine whether Rightmove breached competition law or whether any compensation is payable. Those issues would be considered later if the action is permitted to proceed.
Newman said: “The Tribunal has reserved its judgment, which we respect and appreciate is not unusual. We will not be commenting further while a decision is pending.”
For thousands of estate agents, the immediate question is whether they will be included in the proposed action automatically or required to take steps to join it.
