Will the UK Competition Appeal Tribunal grant permission to appeal the Mastercard interchange 'by object' ruling by December 31, 2026?

The 'by object' classification is legally novel for interchange fees — the first such finding for cross-border and commercial fees. In UK appellate practice, permission to appeal applications are typically handled within 6-12 months of filing. Novel legal questions tend to receive permission to appeal because appellate courts want to clarify the law. Both Mastercard and Visa are appealing, adding weight to the commercial significance. The appeal was filed after the June 2025 ruling; a permission decision by Dec 2026 is highly probable. Given legal novelty, commercial significance, and favorable timeline, permission being granted is more likely than not.

Two components to assess: (1) Will a permission decision be issued by Dec 31, 2026? Given typical UK Court of Appeal timelines of 3-12 months, highly probable (~90%). (2) If decided, will permission be granted? The 'by object' standard is novel for interchange, which favors permission, but the unanimous CAT ruling slightly reduces grounds for appellate review. The committee's unresolved debate about whether 'by object' is a step-change or incremental is itself evidence the legal question merits review. Weighting timeline probability (~90%) and conditional grant probability (~72%) yields ~65%.

The UK appellate system for competition cases allows applying directly to the CAT or Court of Appeal. The 'by object' classification for interchange fees is genuinely novel — the first such finding for cross-border and commercial fees. Mastercard's legal team will argue this represents a departure from established competition law principles, which is a strong basis for permission. The ruling was June 2025, appeal likely filed Q3-Q4 2025. Permission decisions typically take 3-9 months. Even accounting for delays, a decision by Dec 2026 is very likely. The main risk to YES is procedural delay, not denial of permission.

Two-part question. Permission decision by end of 2026 is very likely given UK appellate courts process applications within months and the appeal was filed after June 2025. Permission being granted is also likely: this is a landmark case with a novel legal standard ('by object' for interchange, first ever). Appellate courts are significantly more likely to grant permission when novel points of law are at stake. The unanimous nature of the CAT ruling is a mild negative for appeal prospects, but the novelty of the legal question overwhelms this consideration.

Cases involving genuinely novel legal standards get a significant permission boost. The 'by object' finding for interchange fees is unprecedented. Both Mastercard and Visa appealing on the same point of law inclines courts to grant permission. Timeline risk (no decision by Dec 2026) is real but modest — perhaps 10-15%. If a decision is made, estimated 65-75% chance of permission being granted given legal novelty. The committee explicitly notes novel legal questions are more likely to receive permission, which I weight heavily.

Resolution criteria create asymmetry: YES requires permission granted, while NO captures both denial AND procedural delay. However, the analysis facts strongly support permission being likely: novel 'by object' standard, significant commercial implications, both V and MA appealing. The committee's unresolved debate about whether 'by object' is a step-change or incremental is itself evidence that the legal question merits appellate review. Timeline is favorable — appeal filed ~H2 2025, permission typically within 6-12 months, so decision by mid-2026 is the base case.

Novel legal standard plus major commercial implications equals high likelihood of permission to appeal. UK appellate courts regularly grant permission on important points of law. Both MA and V appealing strengthens the case. Timeline is favorable — decision likely well before Dec 2026. Main risk is procedural delays, which are low probability.

Permission to appeal is the first milestone in a 2-3 year appeal process. The 'by object' classification is unprecedented for interchange fees. Courts want to hear novel legal arguments. The unanimous CAT ruling means the legal question is clear but contested. Permission decisions are usually faster than full hearings, making timeline favorable.

Two factors dominate: legal novelty strongly favors permission being granted, and typical UK appellate court processing times make a decision by Dec 2026 very likely. The 'by object' standard for interchange was a first — exactly the kind of issue appellate courts want to review. Risk of no decision by deadline is low given typical timelines.