Key Facts
- •Claim against Barclays Bank plc under sections 90 and 90A of FSMA 2000.
- •Approximately 130 claimants representing 550 funds or sub-funds.
- •Claimants categorized into three groups based on reliance on Barclays' information.
- •Split trial proposed: Trial 1 for "Barclays-facing issues", Trial 2 for remaining issues.
- •Dispute over whether claimants must answer a detailed reliance questionnaire.
- •Application to add Amundi Funds as claimants.
Legal Principles
In group litigation, rules of pleading should generally be followed, especially without a Group Litigation Order (GLO).
Prudential Assurance Co Ltd v HMRC [2017] 1 All ER 815
Reliance is a necessary ingredient of a cause of action under section 90A of FSMA 2000.
This case
Court considers proportionality and reasonableness when ordering disclosure in group litigation.
This case
Amendments to claims should not change the essential description of the claim.
This case, referencing G4S
Outcomes
Claimants to provide a breakdown of claimants in the three categories by 9 February 2024.
To facilitate sampling and determine issues for Trial 1 and Trial 2.
50 claimants (10 full questionnaires, 40 slimmed-down) to answer reliance questionnaires by 31 May 2024.
Balancing the need for full pleading with the manageability of the case and avoiding excessive delays.
Defendants to file a response to further Particulars of Standing by 26 January 2024, with subsequent replies from claimants and defendants.
To address outstanding standing issues.
Permission granted to amend the claim to add Amundi Funds.
The changes involved did not amount to a change in the essential description of the claim. The funds in question always held the relevant shares.
Issues 1-18 to be tried at Trial 1; other issues to be considered at the second CMC.
To manage the case efficiently and allow for a phased approach to the trial.