Ian Taylor


Hoppa trades from Resorthoppa base £8.25m


Hoppa Group confirmed last week it is operating from the same address in Woking as failed forerunner Resorthoppa which went into administration in March owing £8.25 million. Hoppa, set up in February


as a Special Purchase Vehicle by California-registered transfer technology platform Elife Tech, bought the assets – including a licence to occupy the premises of transfer company Resorthoppa – in a pre-packed administration negotiated prior to the appointment of administrators and effected upon going into administration. Resorthoppa directors Renaldo


Scheepers and Matthew Hall transferred to Hoppa with other employees. There is no suggestion of


impropriety. Administrators acting for KR8 Advisory who handled the sale met all the requirements for transparency. But the amounts owed by


Resorthoppa and its pre-pack administration have led a group of unsecured creditors to consider joint legal action (Travel Weekly, April 17). The company had only recently


emerged from a three-year corporate voluntary arrangement (CVA) which allowed it to continue trading while it repaid £3.28 million to creditors through a court-ordered process overseen by other administrators.


Class action against card firms boosted by court judgment


Ian Taylor


The Court of Appeal rejected a challenge to litigation funding agreements between lawyers, ‘class representatives’ and funders of class action lawsuits last week in a boost to collective proceedings against Mastercard and Visa on behalf of UK travel businesses. The UK Competition Appeal


Tribunal (CAT) gave the go-ahead last August to proceedings against Mastercard and Visa for repayment of fees on commercial card payments – specifically the multilateral interchange fees (MIFs) set by Mastercard and Visa on transactions since June 2016. Lawyers estimate more than


4 10 JULY 2025


£4 billion is owed to UK travel, hospitality and retail companies. The Court of Appeal ruled on


appeals by Visa, Mastercard, Sony and Apple against CAT rulings on collective proceedings between November 2023 and March 2024, which challenged the enforceability of ‘litigation funding agreements’ (LFAs). They argued such LFAs should be categorised as damages- based agreements (DBAs) and deemed unenforceable. However, the Appeal Court


judges noted: “Given the entire landscape of collective proceedings in the CAT is one where third-party litigation funding of claims is required, and . . . the proceeds are the source of the funder’s return,


the appellants’ argument [would produce] the absurd result that funding under LFAs would become practically impossible.” They ruled: “The Court will not


interpret a statute to produce an absurd result unless clearly constrained by the words [of] Parliament.” The judges also dismissed the


argument that an LFA creates a “perverse incentive for lawyers and funders to focus on the largest cases”, concluding: “There is simply no evidence to support the contention. The argument is without merit. These appeals must all be dismissed.” Jeremy Robinson, competition


litigation partner at law firm Harcus Parker who is acting on behalf of class representatives in


Resorthoppa debt when going into administration


Despite these repayments,


the administrators’ statement of proposals when Resorthoppa ceased trading warned there are unlikely to be funds to pay preferential creditors or even the full costs of administration, let alone the unsecured creditors. They reported a pre-pack


administration “was considered the only option” at the time, and that aside from the transfer of directors


benefits of a pre-packaged sale were the transfer of employees and potentially the lease on the trading premises and absence of a break in supply of goods and services. It was considered the only option.” The Insolvency Practitioners


Association notes pre-packed administrations have benefits but attract “high-level interest” and can lead unsecured creditors to “feel disenfranchised and suspicious of the procedure”. Hoppa parent Elife Tech did not respond to a request for comment.


“there is no connection between the purchaser and directors, shareholders or secured creditors of the insolvent company”. The administrators noted: “The


Travel and hospitality firms are taking legal action for repayment of an estimated £4 billion from Mastercard and Visa


the proceedings against Visa and Mastercard, welcomed the Appeal Court’s “very clear decision”. He noted: “This judgment


safeguards access to justice in collective proceedings, ensuring important cases – such as those challenging Mastercard and Visa’s unlawful card fees – can continue.” The action against Mastercard


•For more details, visit commercialcardclaim.co.uk.


and Visa is fully funded, insured and free to join owing to the funding arrangements. Large businesses, with turnovers of £100 million or more, had to register to join the proceedings by February, but smaller businesses are automatically included unless they opt out.


travelweekly.co.uk


PICTURE: Shutterstock/nevodka


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60