The proposed £1.6 billion collective action against Rightmove is about far more than estate agency fees. It is another test of how far the UK’s class action regime should extend—and whether increasingly ambitious claims are being subjected to sufficient scrutiny.

Jeremy Newman, a former Competition and Markets Authority panel member, is seeking to bring the claim on behalf of around 7,200 estate agents, letting agents and property developers, alleging that Rightmove abused its dominant market position by charging excessive listing fees.

Rightmove rejects the allegations and says it will defend the proceedings vigorously.

Importantly, the Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) has not ruled on the merits of the case.

Commercial Success Is Not Proof of Wrongdoing

Rightmove occupies a dominant position in the online property market, accounting for more than 80% of consumer time spent on UK property portals.

That commercial success has become central to the claimant’s case.

But competition law is not designed to punish successful businesses simply because they enjoy strong market positions or healthy profit margins. The legal question is whether dominance has been abused—not whether a company has built a successful business.

That distinction is fundamental.

Anonymous Concerns Should Be Tested

One of the most unusual aspects of the preliminary hearing centred on claims that estate agents were reluctant to support the proceedings publicly because they feared commercial retaliation.

Rightmove strongly disputes those allegations, arguing it would make little commercial sense to damage relationships with its own customers.

The company is seeking disclosure of communications relied upon by the claimant so those assertions can be properly tested. The claimant has agreed to disclose some material, but only with identities removed.

Whether those concerns are genuine is ultimately a matter for the Tribunal. But where allegations form part of the basis for bringing an opt-out collective action, they should be capable of careful examination.

Litigation Funding Continues to Fuel Larger Claims

Like many recent competition claims, the proceedings are backed by professional litigation funding.

Funding has undoubtedly expanded access to collective litigation, but it has also enabled increasingly large claims against major businesses, often before liability has been established.

That makes judicial oversight particularly important at the earliest stages of proceedings.

The Bigger Picture

The Rightmove case reflects a broader trend in UK litigation. Collective actions are becoming larger, more complex and increasingly backed by sophisticated litigation funders.

Where there is evidence of unlawful conduct, businesses should be held to account.

But there is an equally important public interest in ensuring that collective proceedings are driven by evidence rather than assumptions about market success. Large damages claims may attract headlines, but they are no substitute for proving a breach of competition law.

As the UK’s class action regime continues to expand, maintaining that balance will become increasingly important—not only for claimants, but also for businesses operating in competitive markets.