The United Kingdom's Supreme Court today sided with Google in restoring its appeal against a lawsuit that accused it of wrongly tracking users within the iPhone's Safari browser without their consent.
According to the ruling, the judge believed that the lawsuit, which sought to ask for compensation from Google for millions of users allegedly affected by its tracking practices, is "officious" and is acting on behalf of individuals who have not authorized such legal action.
The judge took the view that, even if the legal foundation for the claim made in this action were sound, he should exercise the discretion conferred by CPR rule 19.6(2) by refusing to allow the claim to be continued as a representative action. He characterised the claim as "officious litigation, embarked upon on behalf of individuals who have not authorised it" and in which the main beneficiaries of any award of damages would be the funders and the lawyers.
The case, Lloyd vs. Google, has been a landmark case in the world of privacy cases against larger tech companies. Richard Lloyd claims that between 2011 and 2012, Google tracked users using embedded cookies within its ads network on the iOS Safari browser, despite telling users that no such tracking was taking place.
Lloyd's case against Google was settled in the United States in August 2012, where Google was ruled to pay a $22.5 million penalty. As the FTC wrote at the time, explaining Google's wrongdoing:
In its complaint, the FTC charged that for several months in 2011 and 2012, Google placed a certain advertising tracking cookie on the computers of Safari users who visited sites within Google's DoubleClick advertising network, although Google had previously told these users they would automatically be opted out of such tracking, as a result of the default settings of the Safari browser used in Macs, iPhones and iPads.
According to the FTC's complaint, Google specifically told Safari users that because the Safari browser is set by default to block third-party cookies, as long as users do not change their browser settings, this setting "effectively accomplishes the same thing as [opting out of this particular Google advertising tracking cookie]."
London's High Court initially blocked attempts to bring the case against Google, but the Court of Appeal upheld it. Google subsequently appealed that decision, escalating the case to the UK's Supreme Court. The high court today has decided to keep in place the appeal.
Wednesday October 1, 2025 1:26 pm PDT by Joe Rossignol
iOS 26 was released last month, but the software train never stops, and iOS 26.1 beta testing is already underway. So far, iOS 26.1 makes both Apple Intelligence and Live Translation on compatible AirPods available in additional languages, and it includes some other minor changes across Apple Music, Calendar, Photos, and Safari.
More features and changes will follow in future versions,...
Apple is entering its most significant leadership transition in more than a decade as multiple senior executives prepare to depart and CEO Tim Cook begins to shape the company's next generation of leaders, according to Bloomberg's Mark Gurman.
In the latest edition of his "Power On" newsletter, Gurman explained that Jeff Williams, who was viewed as Cook's potential successor for several...
Thursday October 2, 2025 7:26 am PDT by Joe Rossignol
Nearly two weeks after the iPhone 17 series launched, analysts at investment banking firm Morgan Stanley said demand for the devices has been "modestly stronger than we originally expected," based on a combination of extended shipping estimates on Apple's online store and information it gathered from Apple's supply chain.
There has been strong early demand for the iPhone 17, iPhone 17 Pro,...
Saturday October 4, 2025 8:19 am PDT by Joe Rossignol
Apple's website offers a list of nearly 200 new features and changes (PDF file) included in the software update, released last month.
Apple also shared equivalent lists for iPadOS 26 and macOS Tahoe.
iOS 26 is compatible with the iPhone 11 and newer. To install the update, open the Settings app on your iPhone, tap on General, and tap on Software Update.
Below, we have highlighted eight ...
Friday October 3, 2025 3:39 am PDT by Tim Hardwick
The MacBook Air is Apple's most popular laptop – a thin, fanless machine that wields quiet power thanks to the efficiency of Apple silicon. While the M4 model isn't exactly old, attention is already turning to its successor.
Apple doesn't telegraph new product launches ahead of time, but we can draw a surprisingly clear picture of what to expect by looking at Apple's silicon roadmap,...
Monday October 6, 2025 11:56 am PDT by Juli Clover
With the second beta of iOS 26.1, Apple updated the design of alarms set on the iPhone, making them harder to dismiss than before.
Stopping an alarm in iOS 26.1 beta 2 requires a new Slide to Stop gesture rather than a simple tap. You can continue to tap to snooze an alarm, but if you want to turn it off entirely, you need to use a swipe.
Transitioning from a tap to a slide gesture to...
After launching new iPhones last month, Apple is promoting iCloud+ with a prominent banner on its home page, in a bid to boost its services revenue. In addition to more storage, all iCloud+ plans include five perks for iPhone users.
As a refresher, iCloud includes 5GB of storage for free. If you want extra storage, you need to subscribe to an iCloud+ plan. In the United States, prices range...
Monday October 6, 2025 5:05 am PDT by Tim Hardwick
A new iPad mini is "absolutely" on the way, according to Bloomberg's Mark Gurman. So what should we expect from the successor to the iPad mini 7 that Apple released a year ago?
Processor and Performance
Apple is working on a next-generation version of the iPad mini (codename J510/J511) that features the A19 Pro chip, according to information found in code that Apple mistakenly shared in...
The bottom line is that the UK does not have a class action mechanism (apart from special circumstances). Hence the claim was incompetent as "officious litigation, embarked upon on behalf of individuals who have not authorised it".
The bottom line is that the UK does not have a class action mechanism (apart from special circumstances). Hence the claim was incompetent as "officious litigation, embarked upon on behalf of individuals who have not authorised it".
Ok I understand now. Although the accusation against Google was true, those who brought the lawsuit and no authority to initiate the lawsuit. Therefore, Google gets away with lying to users.
In layman's terms, what is the bottom line? Did the British court decide that Google tracked users despite telling users they were not tracking and although Google did this, it's OK and no penalty for Google?
I think they concluded it was a complete waste of time as 'millions' of people did not give their consent for the law case against google being performed under their names. So the court has in effect throwing the case out highlighting it as a waste of time and only the lawyers will be the beneficiaries from such a case, not the consumers. That's how I've read it.
I also wonder if this means google has not breached any U.K. privacy laws as such either if they've thrown the case out?
