header-logo header-logo

Meta faces mega lawsuit

02 September 2022
Issue: 7992 / Categories: Legal News , Technology , Media , Collective action
printer mail-detail
A date has been set for the first stage of a gigantic opt-out class action against Facebook (now known as Meta), worth a potential £2.2bn

The claim argues that Facebook (Meta) imposed unfair terms, prices and/or trading conditions on UK Facebook users. These include that Facebook unfairly required users to hand over their personal data as a condition of access to the social network and failed to share with its users the profits it made from such data. It seeks compensation for loss and damage that members of the proposed class suffered as a result of this unlawful conduct.

The deadline for anyone wishing to be heard as to whether the case should proceed is 10 October. A certification hearing will be held at the Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) between 30 January and 1 February 2023 to decide whether the claim can proceed as a collective action and move to a full trial.

The proposed class is all people domiciled in the UK between 11 February 2016 and 31 December 2019 who used Facebook at least once. The class representative, subject to authorisation, is Dr Lovdahl-Gormsen, senior research fellow at the British Institute of International and Comparative Law (BIICL) and the director of the Competition Law Forum. 

Kate Vernon from Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan UK, who is representing Dr Lovdahl-Gormsen in the case, said: ‘Earlier this year Facebook/Meta decided not to challenge the tribunal’s jurisdiction over Meta Inc (Facebook’s US parent company) and Meta Ireland (Facebook’s Irish subsidiary), meaning that the case can now progress against all three proposed defendants in earnest.

‘This was an important step for the claim—as it allows the claim to progress more quickly to the first substantive hearing.’

Opt-out class actions are on the rise—consumer finance campaigner Walter Merricks is pursuing a £14bn one against Mastercard, and has already made significant steps forward in the claim, while in May the Court of Appeal rejected BT’s argument that a class action against it for charging excessive landline fees should be ‘opt-in’. Conversely, in April CAT ruled against opt-out in a Forex rigging claim against banks.
Issue: 7992 / Categories: Legal News , Technology , Media , Collective action
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Freeths—Ruth Clare

Freeths—Ruth Clare

National real estate team bolstered by partner hire in Manchester

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Partner appointed head of family team

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

Firm strengthens agriculture and rural affairs team with partner return

NEWS
Conveyancing lawyers have enjoyed a rapid win after campaigning against UK Finance’s decision to charge for access to the Mortgage Lenders’ Handbook
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has launched a recruitment drive for talented early career and more senior barristers and solicitors
Regulators differed in the clarity and consistency of their post-Mazur advice and guidance, according to an interim report by the Legal Services Board (LSB)
The Solicitors Act 1974 may still underpin legal regulation, but its age is increasingly showing. Writing in NLJ this week, Victoria Morrison-Hughes of the Association of Costs Lawyers argues that the Act is ‘out of step with modern consumer law’ and actively deters fairness
A Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) ruling has reopened debate on the availability of ‘user damages’ in competition claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Edward Nyman of Hausfeld explains how the CAT allowed Dr Liza Lovdahl Gormsen’s alternative damages case against Meta to proceed, rejecting arguments that such damages are barred in competition law
back-to-top-scroll