header-logo header-logo

02 September 2022
Issue: 7992 / Categories: Legal News , Technology , Media , Collective action
printer mail-detail

Meta faces mega lawsuit

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

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Private wealth and tax team welcomes cross-border specialist as consultant

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

International hospitality and leisure specialist joins corporate team as partner

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Firm appoints head of intellectual property to drive northern growth

NEWS
Talk of a reserved ‘Welsh seat’ on the Supreme Court is misplaced. In NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC explains that the Constitutional Reform Act treats ‘England and Wales’ as one jurisdiction, with no statutory Welsh slot
The government’s plan to curb jury trials has sparked ‘jury furore’. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke, partner at Hill Dickinson, says the rationale is ‘grossly inadequate’
A year after the $1.5bn Bybit heist, crypto fraud is booming—but so is recovery. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Holloway, founder and CEO of M2 Recovery, warns that scams hit at least $14bn in 2025, fuelled by ‘pig butchering’ cons and AI deepfakes
After Woodcock confirmed no general duty to warn, debate turns to the criminal law. Writing in NLJ this week, Charles Davey of The Barrister Group urges revival of misprision or a modern equivalent
Family courts are tightening control of expert evidence. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Chris Pamplin says there is ‘no automatic right’ to call experts; attendance must be ‘necessary in the interests of justice’ under FPR Pt 25
back-to-top-scroll