Original article ISPreview UK:Read More
The London Court of Appeal has refused permission for Justin Le Patourel to appeal against an earlier dismissal (here) of his £1.3bn class action claim against BT via the Collective Action on Land Lines (CALL) campaign. The organisation had accused the broadband and phone provider of overcharging several million of its landline-only phone customers.
The latest decision this week follows a similar ruling by the Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) in February 2025, which found that the claim had no real prospect of success (here). The CAT followed this up in May 2025 by publishing a cost order, which required the Class Representative (Justin Le Patourel) to pay 85% of the Defendants’ (BT) costs – totalling £16.5m.
Just to recap. The campaign itself was first raised at the start of 2021 via UK law firm Mishcon de Reya, which was acting on behalf of an ex-Ofcom telecoms consultant, Justin Le Patourel. In theory, a victory for the campaign might have forced BT to pay out up to £1.3bn in compensation to customers, but in December 2024 the CAT ruled that “BT’s prices were not unfair, and therefore there was no abuse of dominant position”.
The judge stressed that “just because a price is excessive does not mean that it was also unfair“. The CAT took into account, first, that while BT’s prices were found to be excessive, they were also “radically less than the excess relied upon by [Justin Le Patourel]. This meant that the weight of the excess going forward into the unfairness analysis reduced.”
The court also considered that BT had provided “distinctive value” to its Standalone Fixed Voice (SFV) customers, such that its price “bore a reasonable relation to value“. Value here was found, not just in terms of particular features or “Gives” provided to the customers, but also in BT’s brand value as a whole.
A BT Group spokesperson said:
“Today, the Court of Appeal refused permission for Justin Le Patourel to appeal the Competition Appeal Tribunal’s judgment. We take our responsibilities to all of our customers very seriously and are pleased to see the courts dismiss this matter, bringing it to a resolution.”
Justin Le Patourel said he was “hugely disappointed” by the ruling.