Hausfeld features prominently in The Lawyer's 'Top 20 Litigation' and 'Top 10 Appeals' for 2025

The much anticipated 'Top 20 Cases' and ‘Top 10 Appeals' for 2025 published by The Lawyer highlights the most significant and influential pieces of litigation and appeals to shape the legal landscape this year, focusing on matters with broader legal and procedural implications which often tackle unresolved legal questions or set new precedents. Inclusion in this list is an acknowledgment of the importance of the issues at stake and the expertise of the legal teams involved.

Hausfeld’s impressive showing in The Lawyer’s Top 20 Litigation of 2025 featured the firm's abuse of dominance action by Dr Rachael Kent v Apple featuring on top of the list as well as its participation in the Pan-NOx Emissions Group (Dieselgate) Litigation.

Apple is the first Big Tech company to face trial under the UK collective action regime in a 7-week trial commencing at the start of January 2025, and it is also the joint-second class action to proceed to full trial. Dr Rachael Kent alleges that Apple has abused its dominance by excluding all rivals and charging an excessive 30% commission on apps and in-app purchases from the App Store. Had Apple not engaged in this conduct, consumers would have benefited from greater choice and lower prices.

The Lawyer highlights that: “The case is set to significantly impact several other class actions against technology companies, such as actions against Google, Sony and Meta, which are heading to trial this year and beyond.” Hausfeld also represents Liz Coll in her case against Google, set to go to trial in October this year. 

As part of the 'Top 10 Appeals' feature, the landmark appeal in Phillip Evans v Barclays Bank and others - is only the third Supreme Court case to consider the collective proceedings regime in competition law. Its outcome will be critical for access to justice, shaping how collective proceedings work.

The case, which will be heard on 1 April 2025, arises from cartels in the forex market, where traders from major banks were accused of collusion in online chatrooms. We represent Phillip Evans, who contends that this conduct caused harm to thousands of organisations and individuals trading forex. The Supreme Court will consider two key questions: what factors should determine whether collective proceedings should be opt-in or opt-out, and whether findings from regulatory decisions can be relied upon in the Tribunal against parties that weren't directly addressed in those decisions. The outcome has far-reaching consequences, not just for this case but for all future collective redress mechanisms in the UK.

This consistent recognition reflects our standing as a leader in innovative and high-impact litigation, solidifying our role in shaping the legal landscape.

For the full Top 20 Cases (Subscription required)
For the full Top 10 Appeals (Subscription required)

Other News