UK Competition Courts Face Balancing Act Over Complex Economic Evidence

The tension stems from the CAT’s recent efforts to manage the scale of collective proceedings, specifically through Practice Direction 2/2025, which imposes page limits on expert reports. While the Tribunal seeks proportionality and a reduction in overly abstract modeling, Liam Colley, senior vice president at Cornerstone Research, cautions against misinterpreting this pragmatism as an invitation to dilute analysis. The stakes have shifted significantly since the introduction of the class action regime, with case values ballooning from the exceptional £1 billion mark to unprecedented levels that demand even greater precision.

Legal teams from firms including Freshfields, Linklaters, and Slaughter and May note that the court’s scrutiny of experts has intensified. The Tribunal is increasingly vocal against modeling it deems partisan or detached from commercial realities, forcing experts to bridge the gap between sophisticated economic theory and clear, actionable evidence. As the market for testifying economists evolves, the focus is shifting toward individuals who can pair technical excellence with the judgment required to survive rigorous judicial questioning. The challenge remains how to reconcile these demands for conciseness with the inherent complexity of high-stakes competition disputes.