204 Vodafone Group Plc Annual Report 2026
Strategic report
Governance
Financials
Other information
Following hearings in February and May 2023, the Court of Appeal dismissed both of the appeals, in the case of the Papistas claimants because the stamp duty payments had again not been made. The Papistas claimants filed a further appeal before the Supreme Court in August 2025. There was a further hearing in February 2025 about one aspect of the appeal proceedings (a claim for damages of €2.1 million) which the Court of Appeal referred back to the Athens Court of First Instance in August 2025. Vodafone is continuing vigorously to defend the claims and based on the progress of the litigation so far the Group believes that it is highly unlikely that there will be an adverse ruling for the Group. On this basis, the Group does not expect the outcome of these claims to have a material financial impact. South Africa: Kenneth Makate v Vodacom (Pty) Limited Mr Kenneth Makate, a former employee of Vodacom Pty Limited (‘Vodacom South Africa’), started legal proceedings in 2008 claiming compensation for a business idea that led to the development of a service known as ‘Please Call Me’ (‘PCM’). On 4 November 2025, an immaterial settlement between Vodacom South Africa and Mr Makate was agreed. The related court proceedings have been withdrawn. UK: Mr Justin Gutmann v Vodafone Limited and Vodafone Group Plc In November 2023, Mr Gutmann issued claims in the Competition Appeal Tribunal (‘CAT’) seeking permission, as a proposed class representative, to bring collective proceedings on an opt-out basis against the four UK mobile network operators (‘MNOs’) and, in the case of Vodafone Limited and EE Limited, their respective parent companies. Vodafone Group Plc and Vodafone Limited are named defendants to one of the claims with an alleged value of £1.4 billion (€1.6 billion), including interest. Hutchison 3G UK Limited (‘Three’), which merged with Vodafone Limited in May 2025, is also a named defendant to the claim with an alleged value of £507 million (€578 million), including interest. It is alleged that Vodafone, Three, and the other MNOs used their alleged market dominance to overcharge customers after the expiry of the minimum terms of certain mobile contracts (referred to as a ‘loyalty penalty’). The claim was certified by the CAT in November 2025. Following a successful strike out application based on limitation, the total value of the claims against Vodafone and Three have been reduced to £557 million (€638 million) and £197 million (€225 million), respectively. Defences were filed on 27 February 2026 and Replies on 1 May 2026. A hearing will take place on 1-2 July 2026 to set the timetable to trial. Taking into account all available evidence at this stage, the Group’s assessment is that the allegations are without merit and it intends to defend the claim. The Group is currently unable to estimate any possible loss in regards to this issue but, while the outcome is uncertain, the Group believes it is probable that no present obligation exists. UK: Phones 4U in Administration v Vodafone Limited, Vodafone Group Plc and Others In December 2018, the administrators of former UK indirect seller, Phones 4U, sued the three main UK mobile network operators (‘MNOs ’ ), including Vodafone, and their parent companies in the English High Court. The administrators alleged collusion between the MNOs to withdraw their business from Phones 4U thereby causing its collapse. Following a trial on liability, the High Court issued a judgement in Vodafone’s favour in November 2023 rejecting Phones 4U’s allegations that the defendants were in breach of competition law. In July 2025 the Court of Appeal also rejected all of Phones 4U’s grounds of appeal. Phones 4U has not appealed to the Supreme Court and so the case is closed.
29. Contingent liabilities and legal proceedings (continued) Germany: investigation by competition authority regarding 1&1
In December 2021 1&1 entered into an agreement with Vantage Towers for the provision of infrastructure for tower sites. Vantage Towers sub-contracted certain aspects of the delivery under the agreement to Vodafone Germany. In March 2023, Vodafone Germany and Vodafone Group (together ‘Vodafone’) were informed that 1&1 had submitted a complaint to the Bundeskartellamt (‘BkA’), the competition authority in Germany, alleging infringements of competition law. Following the start of a formal investigation in June 2023, the BkA issued a Statement of Objections on 11 April 2025 with its view that the delayed provision by Vodafone and Vantage Towers of the contractually agreed tower sites acted as an obstacle to 1&1’s market entry and an abuse of relative market power. Vodafone submitted its response to the Statement of Objections to the BkA on 2 July 2025. Vodafone has received a letter from the BkA stating that, if an infringement decision is issued, it is likely to include an order for disgorgement of the alleged economic advantage obtained as a result of the alleged infringement. In November 2025 Vodafone filed an application before the Higher Regional Court of Dusseldorf challenging procedural irregularities in the BkA’s investigative process and seeking an injunction to prevent the BkA from issuing an infringement decision pending the outcome of the Court’s decision. The BkA filed its response to the application and the Court’s decision is pending. While the outcome is uncertain, the Group believes it has strong defences and that it is probable no present obligation exists. Italy: Iliad v Vodafone Italy In July 2019, Iliad filed a claim for €500 million against Vodafone Italy in the Civil Court of Milan which, following the divestment of Vodafone Italy was subject to an indemnity provided by the Group to Swisscom. The claim alleged anti-competitive behaviour in relation to customer portability and certain advertising campaigns by Vodafone Italy. The main hearing on the merits of the claim took place on 8 June 2021. On 17 April 2023, the Civil Court issued a judgement in Vodafone Italy's favour and rejected Iliad's claim for damages in full. Iliad filed an appeal before the Court of Appeal of Milan in June 2023 which was rejected in a decision dated 30 December 2025. Iliad has not filed a further appeal before the Supreme Court and so the case is closed. Greece: Papistas Holdings SA, Mobile Trade Stores (formerly Papistas SA) and Athanasios and Loukia Papistas v Vodafone Greece In October 2019, Mr. and Mrs. Papistas, and companies owned or controlled by them, filed several claims against Vodafone Greece with a total value of approximately €330 million for purported damage caused by the alleged abuse of dominance and wrongful termination of a franchise arrangement with a Papistas company. Lawsuits which the Papistas claimants had previously brought against Vodafone Greece, including one also citing Vodafone Group Plc and certain Directors and officers of Vodafone as defendants, were either withdrawn or left dormant. Vodafone Greece filed a counter claim and all claims were heard in February 2020. All of the Papistas claims were rejected by the Athens Court of First Instance because the stamp duty payments required to have the merits of the case considered had not been made. Vodafone Greece’s counter claim was also rejected. The Papistas claimants and Vodafone Greece each filed appeals.
Powered by FlippingBook