Rightmove has dismissed a £1.5 billion legal claim over its subscription fees while opposing the proposed opt-out mechanism that would automatically enroll thousands of estate agents in the lawsuit. The property website insists agents should instead choose to join the case voluntarily rather than being included by default.
Alternatively, Rightmove has proposed a hybrid arrangement. This dispute forms the core of a two-day certification hearing at the Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT), which began on November 2 and involves around 13,000 estate agencies and property firms.
The £1.5 billion claim and Rightmove’s defense
The legal action, led by proposed class representative Jeremy Newman, accuses Rightmove of abusing its dominant market position by imposing excessive and unfair subscription fees. It also alleges the platform has restricted competition in the sector.
“This claim is without merit,” the statement continued. “We will defend it vigorously.”
Opt-out vs. opt-in: a central disagreement
Newman argues for an opt-out structure, claiming that requiring businesses to register individually would discourage smaller agencies from participating. He notes that many lack the resources to pursue claims alone or join an opt-in action.
“Few, if any, can justify the time, cost, and risk of bringing a claim alone,” Newman said. “The result would be fewer businesses compensated and higher legal costs.”
Rightmove disputes this, asserting that the proposed claimants are identifiable businesses capable of making their own decisions. While it does not seek to dismiss the case entirely, the company opposes the opt-out approach. Instead, it advocates for a hybrid model where businesses spending over £1 million with Rightmove during the claim period (April 1, 2020–April 1, 2026) would need to opt in. Smaller agencies could be included automatically.
Funding, methodology, and tribunal review
The company disputes the proposed approach to calculating compound interest, arguing the methodology lacks sufficient credibility. Rightmove also challenges the claimants’ explanation of exclusionary conduct allegations, stating that Newman has not adequately justified the basis for these claims or demonstrated how additional damages would be determined.
The certification hearing will determine whether the proposed collective action can proceed and, if so, on what basis. Crucially, the hearing will not establish whether Rightmove breached competition law or whether agents are entitled to compensation. Those questions would arise at a later stage if the case proceeds.
Rightmove’s Objections to Claim Methodology and Funding Arrangements
Rightmove has raised concerns about the litigation funding arrangements, including the potential return available to funder Innsworth, which could reach ten times its investment. The company has also questioned the funder’s influence over the proceedings, Newman’s proposed remuneration, and arrangements to cover Rightmove’s legal costs if the claim fails. These are arguments Rightmove is putting before the tribunal, rather than findings against the claimants.
