UK Competition Appeal Tribunal approves £3bn iCloud class action against Apple brought by consumer group Which?, alleging abuse of dominance in cloud storage
Britain's Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) has approved a £3 billion ($4 billion) collective (class action-style) lawsuit against Apple, brought by consumer group Which?, over the company's iCloud storage service. Which? filed the claim in November 2024, arguing that Apple abused a dominant position in cloud storage services by 'trapping' users of iPhones and other Apple devices into its iCloud offering. The consumer group contends that Apple achieved this by technically restricting how certain files can be stored, tying iCloud to iOS devices, and deploying prompts and system design that steered users towards its own service — conduct which, it argues, weakened competition and drove up prices. Apple has denied the claims, stating that no customer is required to use iCloud and that UK customers have plenty of alternatives. The CAT's approval to proceed (known as a certification decision in collective proceedings) does not determine liability; it confirms that the claim meets the threshold for being heard as a collective action on behalf of UK consumers. The case will now move toward a full merits hearing. This follows a growing wave of tech-platform competition claims proceeding through the CAT, which has become the primary venue for collective proceedings under the UK's competition law framework.
Why this matters
The CAT's decision to certify a £3bn collective claim against Apple is a significant development for UK competition litigation. It confirms that the UK's opt-out collective proceedings regime — under which eligible claimants are included automatically unless they actively withdraw — is a viable vehicle for large-scale claims against major technology platforms. The iCloud claim turns on market definition and dominance analysis: Which? must prove that iCloud storage constitutes a relevant market in which Apple holds a dominant position, and that the challenged conduct amounts to an abuse. For law firms, this generates sustained competition litigation work spanning economics expert instruction, disclosure review, and potentially years of merits proceedings. The case also has a deterrent effect on Big Tech platform design choices in the UK more broadly.
On the Ground
On a competition collective proceedings matter a trainee would assist with the disclosure review and categorisation of documents produced during the CAT's disclosure process, help prepare the chronology of Apple's alleged conduct, and research precedents on market definition in digital platform cases for inclusion in skeleton argument research. They would also assist with court filing and service of procedural documents.
Interview prep
Question you might get
“What must Which? prove at the merits stage to succeed in a CAT collective competition claim against Apple, and what is the significance of the certification decision the tribunal has just made?”
Sign up free to see the full answer
A model answer you can lift into an interview — how to frame this story for a partner.
Sign up freeSources
My notes
saved