App Store: Apple abused dominant position
The collective action regime received a timely boost yesterday after a claim against Apple over its App Store became the first case to win at trial.
The £1.5bn action on behalf of approximately 36 million UK iPhone and iPad users – both consumers and businesses – was brought by class representative Dr Rachael Kent, a senior lecturer in digital economy and society education at King’s College London.
She was advised by class action firm Hausfeld, with the case funded by Vannin Capital.
In a 396-page ruling [1], the Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) found that Apple abused its dominant position and overcharged users for buying apps, paying for subscriptions to apps and making in-app purchases.
Typically, 30% of these purchases goes straight to Apple, because the tech giant requires them to be routed through its own payment system.
The CAT said: “In our view, [Apple’s] restrictions cannot sensibly be justified as being necessary or proportionate to deliver the benefits which Apple puts forward as flowing from its objective of an integrated and centralised system.
“On the contrary, the competition which would exist absent the restrictions is in our view much more likely to deliver the benefits that consumers want, in the form and at the price point they want them.”
It comes as the Department of Business and Trade is currently reviewing the responses to its call for evidence [2] over the operation of the collective action regime, which closed last week.
Dr Kent said: “This is a landmark victory – not only for App Store users, but for anyone who has ever felt powerless against a global tech giant. The tribunal has confirmed that Apple has been unlawfully overcharging users for more than 10 years – and that up to £1.5bn should now be returned to UK consumers and businesses…
“This case proves that the UK’s collective action regime is working. It empowers ordinary people and small businesses to hold even the most powerful corporations to account. Today’s ruling sends a clear message: no company, however wealthy or powerful, is above the law.”
Neil Purslow, chairman of the executive committee of International Legal Finance Association, said: “This landmark ruling vindicates the collective actions regime at a pivotal moment. As the government begins its review, this is proof the system works and needs nurturing, not restricting.
“When competition is enforced and corporations know they’ll be held to account, bad business practices can be deterred to the tune of billions of pounds a year.”
On Wednesday, the Competition and Markets Authority designated Apple – and also Google – as having strategic market status, because it has “substantial, entrenched market power” in the mobile phone market.
This is not a finding of wrongdoing but the CMA said the move enabled it to consider “proportionate, targeted interventions to ensure that mobile platforms are open to effective competition, and that consumers and businesses that rely on Google and Apple can have confidence that they are treated fairly”.
There is a related collective action against Google over the Google Play Store, led by consumer advocate Liz Coll, which is due to be heard in early 2026. Both Hausfeld and Vannin are behind it too.
We reported earlier this week that the CAT had granted [3] the first public sector collective proceedings order, with the Home Office as litigation funder and largest class member.
Dr Kent instructed barristers Mark Hoskins KC and Matthew Kennedy from Brick Court Chambers and Tim Ward KC, Michael Armitage and Antonia Fitzpatrick from Monckton Chambers.
Among the members of her consultative group are former Court of Appeal judge Dame Elizabeth Gloster.