Willkie Advises Which? in £3B Competition Claim Against Apple
The consumer choice brand calls Apple's market practices "anti-competitive".
November 14, 2024 at 06:10 AM
2 minute read
LitigationWillkie Farr & Gallagher is advising Which? on a landmark £3 billion claim against Apple for breaching competition law.
The consumer choice company alleges that Apple effectively locked millions of its customers into the iCloud service at “rip-off prices”.
Around 40 million Apple users in the U.K. could be entitled to a payout, with individuals owed an average of over £70 depending on how long they have been paying for the service.
The claim, filed with the Competition Appeal Tribunal, states that Apple disregarded competition law by giving the iCloud storage service preferential treatment. Apple is said to have done this by not allowing customers to back up all of their phone’s data with a third-party provider.
Customers must also pay when storage exceeds the 5GB limit. Which? argues that users are overcharged for the iCloud subscription.
Willkie’s team is being led by partners Boris Bronfentrinker and Elaine Whiteford. Leading competition law barristers Philip Woolfe KC and Jack Williams at Monckton Chambers have also been instructed. Litigation Capital Management (LCM) will fund the claim.
Anti-competition lawsuits, especially those of the class-action variety, have become increasingly popular in recent years, enabled by the opt-out collective action regime introduced by the Consumer Rights Act 2015. Bronfentrinker and Whiteford are now working on multiple such cases, including a claim targeting Amazon’s market practices.
Chief Executive of Which?, Anabel Hoult, said: “We believe Apple customers are owed nearly £3 billion as a result of the tech giant forcing its iCloud services on customers and cutting off competition from rival services.
“By bringing this claim, Which? is showing big corporations like Apple that they cannot rip off U.K. consumers without facing repercussions. Taking this legal action means we can help consumers to get the redress that they are owed, deter similar behaviour in the future and create a better, more competitive market.”
In a statement, Apple said: "Apple believes in providing our customers with choices. Our users are not required to use iCloud, and many rely on a wide range of third-party alternatives for data storage. In addition, we work hard to make data transfer as easy as possible—whether it is to iCloud or another service. We reject any suggestion that our iCloud practices are anti-competitive and will vigorously defend against any legal claim otherwise.”
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
Related Stories
View AllYou Might Like
View AllFacebook Data Breach: German Court Opens Door for Compensation
Donald Trump's Headed Back to the White House. But First, a Sentencing?
Sullivan Cromwell Urges Top Court to Resist Making NY the 'Shangri-La' for Derivative Shareholder Suits
Trending Stories
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250