LONDON (Reuters) – In a recent ruling, Apple and Amazon emerged victorious in the face of a mass lawsuit in Britain that accused the tech giants of colluding to eliminate resellers of new Apple products from Amazon’s platform. The tribunal’s decision on Tuesday dismissed the lawsuit spearheaded by consumer law academic Christine Riefa, acting on behalf of approximately 36 million British consumers who had purchased Apple or Beats products.
Allegations put forth by Riefa’s legal team suggested that Apple and Amazon had struck a deal in 2018 to restrict the presence of most resellers offering Apple and Beats-branded products on Amazon’s marketplace in the United Kingdom. This move was purportedly aimed at diminishing competition for these products in the market. Apple and Amazon vehemently refuted the claims of the lawsuit, which was estimated to be worth 494 million pounds ($602 million) in addition to interest, asserting that the case lacked merit. Consequently, the two companies urged the Competition Appeal Tribunal to reject its advancement.
The tribunal’s ruling hinged on the assertion that Riefa failed to demonstrate the requisite “sufficient independence or robustness” in representing the claimant class, particularly concerning the third-party financing of the litigation. Despite requests for clarification, neither Riefa’s legal team nor representatives from Apple and Amazon were available for immediate comment following the tribunal’s decision.
The Competition Appeal Tribunal’s decision to decline certification for the case, marking an initial phase in such legal proceedings, has drawn attention due to the relatively lenient standards for certification. This outcome underscores the stringent criteria that must be met for a lawsuit of this nature to proceed.
(Reporting by Sam Tobin; Editing by Catarina Demony and Emelia Sithole-Matarise)
