• Sectors we work in banner(2)

    Quick Reads

Lloyd v Google – Supreme Court to deliver judgment tomorrow (on 10 November 2021) – a reminder of the issues at stake

min read

It has been confirmed that the Supreme court will hand down its judgment in Lloyd v Google tomorrow: Future judgments - The Supreme Court

This is a highly important case in the context of data protection, privacy and information law litigation. Charles Russell Speechlys will be providing its expert commentary and analysis as soon as possible after the judgment is released.

In anticipation of the judgment being released, this a brief re-cap of the issues and why they are important:

  • This case will provide vital guidance on when damages can be awarded for infringement of data protection law.
  • The case involves Google’s “Safari work-around” (from a few years ago) which enabled Google to place cookies on users’ devices in order to place advertisements based on the user’s browsing history, even when the Safari browser was set to block third party cookies. As such, Google’s actions were an infringement of data protection law (particularly the rules around requiring consent to the placement of non-essential cookies).
  • Mr Lloyd alleged such infringement and claimed compensation (on his own behalf, but also as a ‘representative action’ on behalf of 5 million + unidentified individuals who were affected by the work-around). Whilst the claim was brought under the DPA 1998, as is the case with the UK GDPR / DPA 2018, Mr Lloyd was able to take advantage of the fact that claims for “material and non-material” damage are permitted, i.e. he didn’t need to show a pecuniary loss.
  • Because the case was brought as a representative action, Mr Lloyd could not however claim compensation in respect of specific damage (as it was impossible to detail how 5 million + individuals may have been affected – i.e. they wouldn’t have all suffered the same levels of distress – and in a representative action, the class members must have a common interest), so instead he claimed for loss of control of the data itself.
  • The claim was dismissed in the High Court but allowed on appeal. Google were granted leave to appeal to the Supreme Court and the hearing was earlier this year. It is this substantive Supreme Court judgment that will be delivered on 10 November 2021.
  • If Mr Lloyd is successful it will mean that damages may, in principle, be awarded for loss of control of data without a claimant having to show any distress or non-pecuniary loss. This may make bringing proceedings for infringement of data protection law far easier for claimants, who will no longer need to demonstrate their hurt feelings or distress.

Look out for our update later this week!

The respondent has issued a claim alleging that the appellant (‘Google’) has breached its duties as a data controller under the DPA to over 4m Apple iPhone users during a period of some months in 2011- 2012, when Google was able to collect and use their browser generated information.

Our thinking

  • IBA Annual Conference 2026

    Jean-Baptiste Beauvoir-Planson

    Events

  • In-House Insights: Next Gen Drinks Reception

    Events

    min read
  • Charles Russell Speechlys Opens New York Office and Connecticut Practice

    Simon Ridpath

    News

    min read
  • Disputes Over Donuts: Sports Arbitration

    Jue Jun Lu

    Podcasts

  • Saudi Center for Commercial Arbitration issues update on arbitration in Saudi Arabia

    Peter Smith

    Insights

    min read
  • First Sanction Against a Health Data Warehouse Controller

    Marguerite Brac de La Perrière

    Insights

    min read
  • Omnibus and Digital Health: Simplification Objective and Resistance from Authorities and Member States

    Marguerite Brac de La Perrière

    Insights

    min read
  • AI in Healthcare in France: CNIL and HAS Guidance on Best Practices, from Development to Use

    Marguerite Brac de La Perrière

    Insights

    min read
  • Richard Davies and Katy Hudson write in City AM on sponsorship activations during the World Cup

    Richard Davies

    In the Press

    min read
  • Back-to-back is not enough: UAE construction subcontracts and multiparty arbitration under the 2026 ICC Rules

    Glenn Bull

    Insights

    min read
  • London International Disputes Week 2026: Key Takeaways on Follow-On Claims in International Sport

    Daniel McDonagh

    Quick Reads

    min read
  • Financier Worldwide quotes Charles Mallows on the importance of IT integration for M&A

    Charles Mallows

    In the Press

    min read
  • Disputes Over Donuts: The UAE’s New Civil Code - Implications for Construction Contracts

    Paula Boast MBE

    Insights

  • London International Disputes Week 2026: Key Takeaways on Open Justice and the Growing Reputational Stakes of Litigation

    Claudine Morgan

    Insights

    min read
  • London International Disputes Week 2026: Key Takeaways on Resolving China-Related Disputes in a Global Era

    Jue Jun Lu

    Insights

  • Frédéric Jeannin and Georgia Fullarton write in Daily Jus on significant French cases in international arbitration

    Frédéric Jeannin

    In the Press

    min read
  • Charles Russell Speechlys obtains Hadkinson order in relation to proceedings to return a child to her father

    Vanessa Duff

    News

    min read
  • ‘Sharenting’ and consent – UAE ruling on posting photos of children online

    Miranda Fisher

    Quick Reads

    min read
  • ‘Don’t Lose Ur Head’…But It Might Lose You Money: Conduct in the No-Fault Divorce Era

    Cara Fung

    Quick Reads

    min read
  • Darren Bailey comments in City AM about mandatory release clauses and the future of football transfers

    Darren Bailey

    In the Press

    min read
Back to top