The UK‘s Court of Appeal has dismissed Blur drummer Dave Rowntree‘s appeal in his proposed class action against PRS for Music over the distribution of “black box” royalties.
The ruling, obtained by MBW, was handed down on Monday (June 29). It upholds the Competition Appeal Tribunal‘s decision in August 2025 to strike out the claim.
It means the proposed class action, brought on behalf of PRS‘s songwriter members, is dismissed.
Rowntree, a songwriter member of PRS, had argued that the society’s distribution of unidentified royalties unfairly disadvantages songwriters as a class.
“Black box” royalties are sums that PRS collects but cannot match to the correct songwriter or publisher because of missing or inaccurate data.
You can read the ruling in full here.
PRS prefers the term “unidentified royalties”, arguing that the problem stems from absent information rather than any failure of transparency.
Under PRS‘s rules, these royalties are distributed to writer and publisher members in the same proportions as identified royalties, an approach known as pro rata distribution.
Rowntree‘s case was that this favors publishers, because a greater share of black box royalties is, in aggregate, likely to be attributable to songwriters.
The Competition Appeal Tribunal struck out the claim in August 2025, concluding it had no reasonable prospect of success.
The Tribunal found that the proposed class was not “owed” the black box royalties, and that the class was, in its words, “in a manner of speaking, suing itself”.
Giving the lead judgment, Lord Justice Miles said there was “no reasonably sustainable case” that PRS‘s pro rata approach amounted to an abuse of its dominant position under the Competition Act.
Lord Justice Zacaroli and Lord Justice Nugee agreed.
The court found that Rowntree had not put forward any alternative, “counterfactual” method of distribution against which the society’s approach could be measured.
“In my judgment the reason why no counterfactual has been advanced, even in general terms, is manifest: it is that the very data failure problem which has given rise to the black box royalties means that there is no plausible basis for suggesting a more accurate (let alone fairer) distribution,” Lord Justice Miles wrote.
The judgment found that even if songwriters are, on average, more likely than publishers to be affected by data errors, that would not make PRS‘s pro rata approach unfair.
“THE ASSUMED FACT THAT THE AVERAGE WRITER WAS MORE PRONE TO DATA ERRORS THAN THE AVERAGE PUBLISHER DOES NOT SUPPORT THE CASE THAT PRO RATA DIVISION IS INHERENTLY UNFAIR.”
Lord Justice Miles
Lord Justice Miles added that PRS “makes reasonable and proportionate efforts and adopts processes” to match royalties to the correct members.
“Far from supporting a case of an abuse of dominance, this shows that the PRS is seeking to do its best to achieve a fair distribution,” the judgment states.
A PRS for Music spokesperson welcomed the ruling.
“The Court of Appeal has once again recognized that this claim has no reasonable prospect of success and has upheld the Competition Appeal Tribunal‘s earlier decision to strike it out, vindicating our longstanding position that this claim was never in the interests of PRS members,” the spokesperson said.
“This class action was fundamentally flawed, and was a complete misrepresentation of our policies from the outset. It would have resulted in PRS members suing the society they collectively own, despite there being soaring costs attached and no logical basis for doing so.”
“We welcome the decision and look forward to continuing to focus on our main priority, which has always been, and remains, delivering value for our members and protecting their rights wherever and whenever their music is used.”
“This legal action has succeeded in shining a light on the magnitude of PRS black box royalties, which the Court accepted amounted to £200m over the period in issue.”
David Rowntree
In response to the ruling, David Rowntree said: “This legal action has succeeded in shining a light on the magnitude of PRS black box royalties, which the Court accepted amounted to £200m over the period in issue. This represents a significant proportion of the total royalties collected by the PRS.
“I think this figure is far too high, especially since I believe this money belongs overwhelmingly to individual writers rather than publishers. I would welcome the opportunity to work with the PRS to find ways to shrink the value of black box royalties for the benefit of its 160,000 songwriter members. There must be better ways for royalties to be identified and paid to the correct songwriter, especially given the pace at which technology is evolving.
“I would like to thank the songwriters who have written to me to express their support for this legal action, which at its heart has always been a call for greater transparency and fairness.
“The outcome of the appeal is not what I had hoped for, but of course I accept the decision of the Court of Appeal that this complaint could not be dealt with as a question of competition law.”
PRS for Music is a non-profit collective management organization owned by its members.
It had around 175,000 members during the period covered by the claim, of which about 165,000 were songwriters and 10,000 were publishers, according to the judgment.
The society paid out £1.07 billion ($1.41 billion) to songwriters, composers and publishers in 2025. PRS now represents the rights of more than 190,000 songwriters, composers and music publishers.
In its August 2025 ruling, the Tribunal recorded that the claim could be for some proportion of up to £200 million in unidentified royalties potentially paid to publishers over the relevant period, and noted the claimant side’s costs of £13 million.
Groups including the Music Managers’ Forum have long argued that the industry’s handling of unclaimed royalties works against smaller and emerging writers.Music Business Worldwide