The Court of Appeal has dismissed an attempt to bring a US-style class action against British Airways for participating in an airfreight price-fixing cartel, just nine days after the European Commission (EC) fined the airline more than €100m (£85m) for its role in the cartel and told claimants that they could seek damages in national courts.

On 18 November, the Court of Appeal refused to allow the claimants’ appeal in Emerald Supplies v British Airways to proceed as a representative action. Affirming a High Court judgment in April 2009, the court ruled that the claimant class did not all have the ‘same interest’ in the claim, as required by strict court rules on representative actions.

On 9 November, British Airways and 10 other airlines were fined almost €800m (£683m) in total by the EC for fixing the prices of fuel surcharges, in breach of EU competition law.

The EC said in a statement at the time: ‘Any person or firm affected by anti-competitive behaviour as described in this case may bring the matter before the courts of the member states and seek damages. [European law confirms] that in cases before national courts, a commission decision is binding proof that the behaviour took place and was illegal. Even though the commission has fined the companies concerned, damages may be awarded.’

The EC will soon launch a Europe-wide consultation on collective actions, after it failed to push through a harmonising directive on the issue at the end of last year.

Giving leading judgment in the Court of Appeal case, Lord Justice Mummery said: ‘After all the applications, arguments, authorities, amendments and adjournments, it is a straightforward [case] that falls outside the rule on representative actions. [The claimants] do not all have "the same interest" required by the rule.’

Representative actions mirror US ‘opt-out’ class actions, where affected parties can claim damages even if they did not join successful claimants in the case.