Amazon is facing a new competition lawsuit in Britain. The latest claim, filed on Thursday, seeks more than £2.7 billion in damages – or about $3.4 billion at current exchange rates – at the UK Competition Appeals Tribunal.
The case is being brought by Andreas Stephan, professor of competition law at the University of East Anglia and head of its Law School, on behalf of more than 200,000 British third-party sellers on Amazon.
The lawsuit alleges that Amazon abused a dominant position in offering its marketplace services to third-party sellers to reach customers in the UK in multiple ways – including by discriminating in favour of its own retail offering versus that of third parties; discriminating in favour of its own logistics services (known as Fulfilled by Amazon, or FBA); and unfairly making access to its Prime membership product conditional on using FBA.
The claim also alleges that Amazon disrupts completion between platforms by making it harder for third-party sellers to sell more cheaply on other platforms.
“As a result of these abuses, third-party sellers have lost sales, incurred higher costs, and paid higher fees to Amazon for its services than they would have under normal competitive conditions,” the complainant wrote in a press release.
The allegations should be familiar, as regional competition authorities have spent years investigating complaints about Amazon’s use of third-party data and the way it operates various parts of its marketplace, including FBA and Prime. Amazon has also faced similar antitrust charges in the U.S. in recent years.
Since the UK lawsuit is an opt-out class action, eligible sellers will be automatically included unless they request not to be included. No seller fees are included, but if the claim prevails, sellers who have not opted out will be entitled to a share of any compensation or settlement.
The eligibility criteria is any UK-based individual or business who used a professional account to sell on Amazon to UK consumers between June 2018 and June 2024. More details about the legal action – and a form to register for updates – can be found on the claims website: https://www.amazon3psellerclaim.com.
The lawsuit is being funded by Innsworth Capital Limited, a major litigation funder that is backing a number of other class action lawsuits against tech giants in Britain and Europe – including a $3.1 billion competition claim against Meta; and privacy litigation against Oracle and Salesforce.
Innsworth will pay all costs of the case and has a chance to receive a portion of any damages awarded or settlement payment that Amazon may seek to make.
Amazon was contacted for comment on the UK lawsuit but had not responded at the time of writing.
It's not the first class action-style legal action the e-commerce giant has faced in Britain over competitive abuse claims: earlier this month, a similar damages claim was filed by the British Association of Independent Retailers, on behalf of its thousands of members. In that case, the lawsuit is seeking £1.1 billion in damages.
We asked whether Stephan sees any prospect of the combination of the two collective British competition abuse claims.
As noted above, the wave of competition litigation against Amazon follows years of antitrust scrutiny in Britain and Europe over its use of third-party sellers' data and concerns that there is not a level playing field in the marketplace.
In recent years, the American e-commerce giant has also faced accusations of competitive abuse on its own territory. Last September, the Federal Trade Commission, along with attorneys general from 17 states, filed suit against Amazon, alleging the company used a series of monopolistic practices to illegally stifle competition.
The Washington, DC Attorney General also filed a previous claim in May 2021, accusing Amazon of suppressing competition by controlling third-party sellers, including through price fixing and by blocking third-party sellers from selling their products elsewhere sell less.
Amazon settled the EU's antitrust investigations in December 2022 – without receiving a financial penalty but agreeing to make a series of changes to the way it operates its market. Last November, the company reached a similar settlement with the UK Competition and Markets Authority – again with no financial penalty for past conduct.
Even if sanctions had been imposed by antitrust regulators, such fines would only punish the company itself. This type of enforcement does not provide immediate relief for victims of abuse – therefore there is an opportunity for compensation claims and litigation funders to intervene.
