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

Arc Pensions Law—Ian D’Costa

Arc Pensions Law—Ian D’Costa

Pensions firm welcomes legal director in London

Shakespeare Martineau—Jonathan Warren

Shakespeare Martineau—Jonathan Warren

Real estate disputes team strengthened by London partner hire

Morgan Lewis—Christian Tuddenham

Morgan Lewis—Christian Tuddenham

Litigation partner joins disputes team in London

NEWS
Government plans for offender ‘restriction zones’ risk creating ‘digital cages’ that blur punishment with surveillance, warns Henrietta Ronson, partner at Corker Binning, in this week's issue of NLJ
Louise Uphill, senior associate at Moore Barlow LLP, dissects the faltering rollout of the Leasehold and Freehold Reform Act 2024 in this week's NLJ
Judgments are ‘worthless without enforcement’, says HHJ Karen Walden-Smith, senior circuit judge and chair of the Civil Justice Council’s enforcement working group. In this week's NLJ, she breaks down the CJC’s April 2025 report, which identified systemic flaws and proposed 39 reforms, from modernising procedures to protecting vulnerable debtors
Writing in NLJ this week, Katherine Harding and Charlotte Finley of Penningtons Manches Cooper examine Standish v Standish [2025] UKSC 26, the Supreme Court ruling that narrowed what counts as matrimonial property, and its potential impact upon claims under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975
In this week's NLJ, Dr Jon Robins, editor of The Justice Gap and lecturer at Brighton University, reports on a campaign to posthumously exonerate Christine Keeler. 60 years after her perjury conviction, Keeler’s son Seymour Platt has petitioned the king to exercise the royal prerogative of mercy, arguing she was a victim of violence and moral hypocrisy, not deceit. Supported by Felicity Gerry KC, the dossier brands the conviction 'the ultimate in slut-shaming'
back-to-top-scroll