Other regulatory law

Travel and holidays

Members have acted for both major travel companies and individuals in relation to disputes and litigation arising out of the Timeshare, Holiday Products, Resale and Exchange Regulations 2010 and the Package Travel and Linked Travel Arrangements Regulations 2018. Members have also advised the Civil Aviation Authority and major airlines in relation to potential enforcement action under the Enterprise Act 2002 and the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008, as well as the application of the Montreal Convention and Regulation 261/2004 to consumer claims arising from flight delays and cancellations.

• Ryanair DAC v the CAA [2022] EWCA Civ 76: liability of air carriers to pay compensation under Regulation 261/2004 following industrial action by staff;
• R (Clydesdale Financial Services Ltd and Shawbrook Bank Ltd) v FOS [2022]: Judicial review in relation to Ombudsman decisions in relation to the application of the Timeshare, Holiday Products, Resale and Exchange Regulations 2010;
• The CMA v British Airways [2021]: CMA investigation into refunds for passengers who were unable to fly as a result of the Covid 19 pandemic;
• The CMA v Bijou Weddings Group [2020]: CMA investigation into cancellation of weddings as a result of the Covid 19 public health restrictions;
• Jet2.com Ltd v the CAA [2019] EWHC 336 (Admin): judicial review proceedings brought by Jet2 in relation to a CAA press release criticising the airline;
• Gahan v Emirates [2017] EWCA Civ 1530: liability arising in relation to “connecting flights” under Regulation 261/2004;
• The CAA v An online package holiday provider [2017]: CAA investigation into alleged misleading practices in the comparative sale of packaged flights and accommodation;
• Dorset CC v Alpine Elements Ltd [2013]: Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008 inapplicable to package travel case; sectoral package travel directive should apply instead.

Advertising standards

Members advise on submissions to the ASA and represent parties in ASA adjudications. Recent examples include:

• an adjudication against a major sports goods retailer concerning misleading price promotions;
• an adjudication against a contact lens manufacturer in relation to comparative advertising;
• adjudications that advertisements were misleading if they suggested that the decision to take out a loan “had not been carefully considered”;
• the “crazy frog” ringtone adjudication (before both the ASA and ICSTIS panels);
• adjudications concerning misleading pricing by high street retailers;
• an adjudication concerning borderline medicinal claims.

Litigated cases include:

• Camden LBC v D [2020]: prosecution of an alternative health practitioner for misleading health claims in advertising;
• The Secretary of State for Business Innovation and Skills v PLT Anti-Marketing Ltd [2015] EWCA Civ 76: concerning the meaning of ‘material information’ for the purpose of Regulation 6 of the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008;
• Gateshead MBC v CC Automotive Group [2008]: consumer credit advertising; typical APR; car sales;
• Gateshead MBC v Reg Vardy plc [2008]: consumer credit advertising; pricing of cars

Telecommunications and utilities

Members have been active in advising OFGEM, OFCOM and telecom and mobile phone companies on regulatory issues, including advice on enforcement action under the Enterprise Act 2000 and the General Conditions. We also advise businesses on compliance with the Communications Act 2003, OFCOM Guidance and the General Conditions (including advising on challenges to early termination charges, automatic renewable contracts and minimum term renewals). Members draft and advise on standard contractual terms, and advise and represent telecom and mobile phone companies in relation to legal challenges by consumers.

• The Secretary of State for Business Innovation and Skills v PLT Anti-Marketing Ltd [2015] EWCA Civ 76: concerning the meaning of ‘material information’ for the purpose of Regulation 6 of the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008;
• R v Scottish and Southern Energy plc (CA) (2012) 176 J.P. 241; [2012] C.T.L.C. 1: doorstep sales; electricity supply industry.

Estate agency

Members of chambers have appeared before the OFT , the DTI and the Upper Tribunal in relation to prohibition orders made under the Estate Agents Act 1979.

• The London Borough of Camden v Foxtons Ltd [2017]: concerning the correct interpretation of the duty on letting agents to publicise fees under section 83 of the Consumer Rights Act 2015;
• Jackson Howes v Halligan [2009]: alleged contravention of Estate Agents Act 1979; disclosure of charges to residential landlord.

Road traffic

Members of chambers prosecute and defend a variety of road traffic offences. We also represent companies for alleged breaches of operators’ licences.

• Traffic Commissioners v Stringer Asset Finance [2011]: release of impounded stretch limousine to finance company with title;
• Traffic Commissioners v McLeans Coaches [2010]: fitness to hold operator’s licence of administrator of a coach company which had sold its assets;
• Traffic Commissioners v Angora Ltd [2009]: demonstration of fitness to hold operator’s licence.