This page contains a number of the main documents that have been filed in support of the claim, including:
- The Collective Proceedings Claim Form and annexes; and
- Evidence in support of the proposed claim.
Mr Evans intends to ensure that members of the proposed classes have as much information about the proposed claim as possible. He will therefore keep this section of the website under review and aims to publish further documents relating to the claim in due course.
The Collective Proceedings Claim Form sets out Mr Evans’ proposed claim for damages against the banks in detail, and explains why the claim is suitable to be brought as collective proceedings. It also details the reasons why Mr Evans should be authorised to act as the class representative. The Claim Form includes a provisional estimate of damages (which will be updated once the claim progresses and further information is received). For more information on this, please see FAQ25.
The Claim Form also includes certain documents as annexes:
(a) the two decisions issued by the European Commission concerning the foreign exchange spot trading cartels and a press release published by the European Commission summarising its findings; and
(b) documents that are relevant to the administration of the claim if it is authorised by the Competition Appeal Tribunal to proceed, such as: a draft Collective Proceedings Order (or CPO) certifying the claim to proceed, a proposed notice which would be sent to persons who may be covered by the claim, and a copy of the definition of the proposed classes.
The Commission issued two decisions containing its findings regarding two foreign exchange spot trading cartels. These are the decisions upon which Mr Evans relies in this proposed claim.
The decisions are called the “Three Way Banana Split” and the “Essex Express” decisions after the names of the online chatrooms used by the traders involved in the cartels.
The European Commission provided the non-confidential versions of the decisions to Mr Evans following a request made by him pursuant the EU Access to Documents Regulation (Regulation (EC) No. 1049/2001).
The Commission summarised its findings in the decisions in a press release issued on 16 May 2019.
The class definition identifies the two classes of persons that would be covered by Mr Evans’ proposed claim. A further explanation of the class definition is provided in the Claim Form at pages 25-44.
A person wishing to bring collective proceedings as a class representative must first obtain permission from the Competition Appeal Tribunal for the claim to proceed. This is known as obtaining a Collective Proceedings Order (CPO).
This is the draft CPO which Mr Evans requests the Tribunal to make in his favour in order to permit his proposed claim to proceed on behalf of the two proposed classes.
If the Competition Appeal Tribunal makes a CPO in Mr Evans’ favour, he will be required to give notice to class members that such an order has been made in a form and manner approved by the Tribunal. Mr Evans has produced this draft notice which he will ask the Tribunal to approve if a CPO is made in his favour.
Evidence in support of Mr Evans’ proposed claim
First Witness Statement of Phillip Gwyn James Evans and Exhibits
Mr Evans’ witness statement explains the reasons he wishes to act as class representative in this proposed claim. It also explains the reasons why Mr Evans considers that he has the skills and resources necessary to take on the role of class representative and to act fairly and adequately in the interests of class members.
It includes information about the steps that Mr Evans proposes to take to manage the claim, which are further set out in the detailed Litigation Plan (available to download below). Mr Evans’ witness statement also provides further detail regarding the funding and insurance arrangements put in place to fund the claim.
Mr Evans’ CV contains details of his background and experience.
This document provides further information regarding the Consultative Panel that Mr Evans has appointed to assist him in managing the claim. The current members of the consultative panel are Lord Carlile of Berriew CBE QC and Professor Philip Marsden.
The Litigation Plan sets out how Mr Evans and his legal advisers will ensure that the proposed claim will be effectively and efficiently pursued in the interests of the proposed classes, including how Mr Evans will ensure that he communicates effectively with members of the proposed classes.
The Notice and Administration plan has been prepared by Angeion Group, an experienced class action and administration company which has been engaged by Mr Evans. The Angeion Plan is focused on explaining how those persons within the proposed classes will be made aware of the proposed claim and appropriately targeted with any relevant notices.
The Proposed Timetable contains an estimated timeframe for the progress of the proposed claim.
The Costs Budget sets out estimates of the costs involved in bringing the proposed claim and administering the claim on behalf of the classes.
First Witness Statement of Anthony John Maton and Exhibit
The Tribunal’s assessment of Mr Evans’ application for a CPO may include consideration of the experience of Mr Evans’ legal representatives. Anthony Maton is the managing partner of Hausfeld & Co LLP, the law firm that Mr Evans has instructed to represent him in his application for a CPO. Mr Maton provides information about his and Hausfeld’s experience and expertise.
Mr Maton’s statement also explains some of the steps that Hausfeld took to obtain the non-confidential versions of the European Commission’s decisions on Mr Evans’ behalf.
This includes a profile of Hausfeld’s relevant experience and professional biographies of each member of the team of barristers that Mr Evans has instructed. The barristers representing Mr Evans are Aidan Robertson QC, Victoria Wakefield QC, Joanne Box and Aaron Khan, all of Brick Court Chambers.
Second Witness Statement of Anthony John Maton
Mr Maton’s second witness statement describes the amendments that were made to this proposed claim after Mr Evans received copies of the confidential versions of the European Commission’s decisions from the banks. Mr Maton also provides further information regarding Mr Evans’ funding arrangements, and explains that Mr Evans has obtained additional ATE insurance.