header-logo header-logo

Meta mega-claim clears hurdle

06 November 2024
Issue: 8093 / Categories: Legal News , Class actions
printer mail-detail

Meta has failed in its attempt to stop a class action against it for allegedly abusing its dominant position by extracting commercially valuable data from users without offering payment

The claim, potentially worth more than £2bn, centres on Meta’s practice of collecting data from its users’ activities on platforms other than Facebook, as a take-it-or-leave-it condition for using Facebook. It alleges this was an unfair trading condition, and that Meta combined this off-Facebook and on-Facebook data to generate valuable targeted advertising revenue.

In February, the Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) certified the claim on an opt-out basis (after declining an earlier version of the claim), holding it was ‘clearly’ arguable. It refused Meta’s application to appeal. Meta then applied to appeal at the Court of Appeal.

Meta argued the CAT erred or at least arguably erred in its findings with regard to the methodology chosen by class representative Dr Liza Lovdahl Gormsen, a legal academic, to establish unfair pricing, and as to the logic of the way in which the causal link was pleaded.

Lords Justice Green and Lewis refused Meta permission to appeal, handing down their judgment this week, in Meta Platforms and others v Dr Liza Lovdahl Gormsen [2024] EWCA Civ 1322.

Giving the lead judgment, Green LJ said ‘the use of data as a proxy for monetary payment is a rapidly increasing phenomenon of modern digital life and as such it is generating a range of new legal issues’.

Green LJ said ‘there is nothing in the approach being mooted by [Lovdahl Gormsen] which is outwith normal methodologies.

‘But even if there is novelty in the issues arising it must be for the CAT to delve into such novelties to form a view, and it is not for this Court to seek to cut off such analysis before it has even been embarked upon’. 

Issue: 8093 / Categories: Legal News , Class actions
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Pillsbury—Steven James

Pillsbury—Steven James

Firm boosts London IP capability with high-profile technology sector hire

Clarke Willmott—Michelle Seddon

Clarke Willmott—Michelle Seddon

Private client specialist joins as partner in Taunton office

DWF—Rory White-Andrews

DWF—Rory White-Andrews

Finance and restructuring offering strengthened by partner hire in London

NEWS
Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys LLP [2025] EWHC 2341 (KB) continues to stir controversy across civil litigation, according to NLJ columnist Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School—AKA ‘The insider’
SRA v Goodwin is a rare disciplinary decision where a solicitor found to have acted dishonestly avoided being struck off, says Clare Hughes-Williams of DAC Beachcroft in this week's NLJ. The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT) imposed a 12-month suspension instead, citing medical evidence and the absence of harm to clients
In their latest Family Law Brief for NLJ, Ellie Hampson-Jones and Carla Ditz of Stewarts review three key family law rulings, including the latest instalment in the long-running saga of Potanin v Potanina
The Asian International Arbitration Centre’s sweeping reforms through its AIAC Suite of Rules 2026, unveiled at Asia ADR Week, are under examination in this week's NLJ by John (Ching Jack) Choi of Gresham Legal
In this week's issue of NLJ, Yasseen Gailani and Alexander Martin of Quinn Emanuel report on the High Court’s decision in Skatteforvaltningen (SKAT) v Solo Capital Partners LLP & Ors [2025], where Denmark’s tax authority failed to recover £1.4bn in disputed dividend tax refunds
back-to-top-scroll