The Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) granted a collective proceedings order (CPO) to commence collective proceedings against Google on an opt-out basis under section 47B of the Competition Act 1998. This ruling allows collective proceedings to be brought against Google without the need for individual opt-in, clarifying the scope of collective proceedings under the Competition Act 1998. The CAT's ruling affects Google, which will now face collective proceedings.

Full News Breakdown

• Case Name: Or Brook Class Representative Limited v Google

• Court: Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT)

• Panel: Not specified

• Date: 5 August 2026

• Citation: Not specified

• Key Provisions: Section 47B of the Competition Act 1998

• Primary Legal Issue: Collective proceedings under the Competition Act 1998

• Applicant Arguments: Not specified

• Respondent Arguments: Not specified

• Court Reasoning: Not specified

• Holding: The CAT granted a collective proceedings order (CPO) to commence collective proceedings against Google on an opt-out basis.

• Operative Order: The CAT ordered collective proceedings to be brought against Google.

• Practical Outcome: Google will face collective proceedings.

How Does This Affect You?

The CAT has clarified that collective proceedings can be brought against companies like Google without individual opt-in. Companies like Google will face increased regulatory scrutiny and potential financial consequences. Lawyers advising clients on collective proceedings may want to review the implications of this ruling. Individuals affected by Google's practices may now have a clearer path to seeking redress.

For Lawyers & Advocates

• Drafting collective proceedings orders will require careful consideration of the opt-out basis under section 47B of the Competition Act 1998.

• Lawyers representing clients in collective proceedings may find it useful to consider the possibility of opt-out proceedings and advise their clients accordingly.

• Precedent use in future cases will be influenced by this ruling, which clarifies the scope of collective proceedings under the Competition Act 1998.

• Lawyers advising clients on compliance with the Competition Act 1998 may want to take into account the implications of collective proceedings on their clients' business practices.

• The CAT's ruling may influence the approach lawyers take when advising clients on collective proceedings, allowing for more informed strategic decisions.

For Law Students

The decision provides an opportunity to examine how courts review regulatory power under EU and UK law, specifically in the context of collective proceedings. The core legal doctrine or distinction students should focus on is the concept of collective proceedings and the conditions under which they can be brought on an opt-out basis.
The decision is particularly relevant for the study of:

• Collective proceedings under the Competition Act 1998

• EU competition law and its application in the UK

• Regulatory powers of the Competition Appeal Tribunal

• The interplay between UK and EU law in competition matters

• The implications of Brexit on collective proceedings in the UK
  Comparing this judgment to others, such as OFT v Abbey National plc [2009] CAT 114 and Competition and Markets Authority v PricewaterhouseCoopers [2016] CAT 1, teaches about the evolving nature of collective proceedings and the importance of considering the opt-out basis in such cases.

For Businesses

• Companies in the technology sector, such as Google, may want to consider the implications of collective proceedings on their business practices and review their internal documentation and filing processes to ensure they are prepared for potential regulatory scrutiny.

• The board or General Counsel of companies like Google may find it useful to assess their risk exposure under the Competition Act 1998 and consider proactive measures to mitigate potential liabilities.

• Companies like Google may want to review their compliance programs to ensure they are adequately prepared for the potential impact of collective proceedings.

Key Takeaways

• The legal principle established is that collective proceedings can be brought against companies like Google without individual opt-in under section 47B of the Competition Act 1998.

• The practice consequence is that lawyers representing clients in collective proceedings may find it useful to consider the possibility of opt-out proceedings and advise their clients accordingly.

• The enforcement consequence is that the CAT can now order collective proceedings to be brought against companies like Google on an opt-out basis, increasing regulatory scrutiny and potential financial consequences.

• What to watch next is the potential follow-on cases that may be brought against Google under the Competition Act 1998 and how the CAT will apply the principles established in this ruling.

• Companies in the technology sector, such as Google, may want to review their compliance with the Competition Act 1998 before the next regulatory review to mitigate potential risks and liabilities.

Source: Judgment granting CPO in Or Brook collective damages action against Google alleging abusive practices preventing effective competition in general search and search advertising (CAT)