The Supreme Court has dealt a blow to millions of bank customers hoping to recoup overdraft charges after it overturned two earlier court rulings allowing the Office of Fair Trading to investigate the fairness of unauthorised overdraft fees.

In his statement, the Supreme Court's President Lord Phillips ruled that overdraft charges were deemed to form part of the price or remuneration for the package of services that the banks provide to current account customers.

Campaigners have reacted angrily to the decision. In an interview with the BBC, Phil Jones from Which? Magazine said that he was "utterly outraged" by the ruling, while consumer champion and financial campaigner Martin Lewis said: "I think we need to spit, I think we need to kick, I think we need to make sure that every MP in this land knows quite how angry we are over this. What we need is fairness."

For the banks, a serious amount of money was at stake. According to a recent report, an estimated £2.6 billion a year is generated from overdraft charges, approximately a third of all the revenue received from operational current accounts. But for most people it's not an issue; only about one in five customers incurs these charges.

Now instead of one big payout, individual disputes may have to be settled in court, a messy and uncertain process. But the British Bankers Association, which represents the banks, has welcomed the judgement, saying today's ruling brings some legal clarity; if customers want an overdraft they should simply ask for it first.

Although today's ruling is a significant victory for the banks, the banking industry as a whole accept this saga has been damaging. Most have already reduced their overdraft fees and these days all charges are coming under much greater scrutiny.