Today's Edition
LONDON (dpa)
Google is facing a £25 billion ($33.7 billion) legal claim in the UK, accusing the tech giant of abusing its dominant position in the online search advertising market.
The claims that Google's agreements with mobile device manufacturers to make Google Search the default search engine on devices has prices pushed up for UK advertisers.
The claim is being led by Roger Kaye KC, a former deputy High Court judge, and has been filed at the Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT), where it alleges Google's unlawful conduct has impacted between 500,000 and 1.5 million UK advertisers, resulting in "excessive and unfair prices" for advertising.
It is seeking compensation for all advertisers who paid Google for search advertising from January 1, 2011 until now, estimating an aggregated award of up to £25 billion.
The claim argues that Google's agreements with phone manufacturers and network operators to make Google's search engine the default option on their products meant it has been able to maintain a degree of domination in the significant search market, and as a result charge higher prices.
The US tech giant is already facing a similar legal claim at CAT over its search advertising business, and a judge in the US ruled last year that it is running a monopoly in search.
The company is now fighting proposals that it could be required to break up its digital empire and sell off parts of its business, such as its Chrome web browser, as part of the remedies in that case.
Kaye said: “This case marks a significant step in re-establishing a fair and competitive landscape for all advertisers.
“The unlawful conduct has already been proven by both the European Commission and a US court, and it is time that all affected UK advertisers are duly compensated for the financial repercussions to their business.”
A Google spokesperson said: “These types of meritless claims are brought by lawyers seeking profit and bring little-to-no benefit to those they represent.
"Consumers and advertisers use Google because it's helpful, not because there are no alternatives."
