No Damage – No extra jurisdiction Service
Application to serve proceedings here – allegation that over some months Google acted in breach its duty under the 1998 Act by secretly tracking the internet activity of Apple iPhone users, collating and using the information it obtained by doing so, and then selling the accumulated data. The method by which Google was able to do this is generally referred to as ‘the Safari Workaround’.
Held: The facts alleged in the Particulars of Claim did not support the contention that the Representative Claimant or any of those whom he claimed to represent had suffered ‘damage’ within the meaning of DPA s 13. The Representative Claimant failed to establish that the claim was one arguably within PD6B 3.1(9), or that it had a real prospect of success, and permission to serve these proceedings on Google outside the jurisdiction was refused.
Warby J
[2018] EWHC 2599 (QB), [2018] WLR(D) 636
Bailii, WLRD
Data Protection Act 1998
England and Wales
Information, Jurisdiction, Litigation Practice
Updated: 01 November 2021; Ref: scu.625543
