Google Defeated in English Court - Decision Opens Door for Litigation by Millions of British Apple Users
The Court of Appeal of England and Wales has dismissed an attempt by Google to prevent British computer users from being able to sue it in England.
The hearing followed an earlier defeat for Google in the English High Court in which it was unsuccessful in preventing three British computer users from having the right to sue it for breach of privacy, after the computer giant ignored users wishes not to have tracking cookies placed on their computers. Google took the matter to Appeal, arguing that the issue was not serious and, in any case, the claimants could not demonstrate they had lost out financially as a consequence of the company's actions. The Court of Appeal disagreed, stating in its judgment:
"These claims raise serious issues which merit a trial. They concern what is alleged to have been the secret and blanket tracking and collation of information, often of an extremely private nature? about and associated with the claimants' internet use, and the subsequent use of that information for about nine months. The case relates to the anxiety and distress this intrusion upon autonomy has caused."
The Court of Appeal also confirmed the Mr Justice Tugendhat judgement in the High Court that breach of privacy is a tort, dismissing Google's argument that it should only be actionable if there is a financial loss.
The judgment set out clearly how Google profits from its advertising service that relies on tracking cookies, stating that the company "makes an annual profit of billions of dollars from the DoubleClick service" in which the DoubleClick ID Cookie, when placed onto a user's browser, gathered data such as surfing habits, social class, race and ethnicity, sexual interests, trade union membership, religious and political beliefs, mental and physical health and financial situation. This information was gathered through what is known as the 'Safari workaround' in spite of the Apple Safari web browser's default privacy settings, that opted out of permitting tracking cookies for nine months in 2011 and 2012.
The decision opens the door to litigation by millions of Britons who used Apple computers, iPhones and iPads during the relevant period of Summer 2011 and Spring 2012.
"These claims raise serious issues which merit a trial. They concern what is alleged to have been the secret and blanket tracking and collation of information, often of an extremely private nature? about and associated with the claimants' internet use, and the subsequent use of that information for about nine months. The case relates to the anxiety and distress this intrusion upon autonomy has caused."
The Court of Appeal also confirmed the Mr Justice Tugendhat judgement in the High Court that breach of privacy is a tort, dismissing Google's argument that it should only be actionable if there is a financial loss.
The judgment set out clearly how Google profits from its advertising service that relies on tracking cookies, stating that the company "makes an annual profit of billions of dollars from the DoubleClick service" in which the DoubleClick ID Cookie, when placed onto a user's browser, gathered data such as surfing habits, social class, race and ethnicity, sexual interests, trade union membership, religious and political beliefs, mental and physical health and financial situation. This information was gathered through what is known as the 'Safari workaround' in spite of the Apple Safari web browser's default privacy settings, that opted out of permitting tracking cookies for nine months in 2011 and 2012.
The decision opens the door to litigation by millions of Britons who used Apple computers, iPhones and iPads during the relevant period of Summer 2011 and Spring 2012.
