Lloyd v Google: UK Supreme Court holds that England’s representative rule can be used to craft a class action

Introduction

The UK Supreme Court just released its long-awaited judgment in Lloyd v Google[1], deciding whether England’s representative action rule can be used for the purposes of a class action.[2] The answer is a qualified “yes” – but not for Mr Lloyd’s case, which alleged that Google had collected the personal information of an estimated 4.4 million users of the Safari Internet browser without their consent.[3] This article will analyze the Court’s judgment.[4]

The Court held that Civil Procedure Rule (CPR) 19.6 (the representative rule) could be used for a class action for damages in two circumstances:

1. Where damages sustained by the group can be assessed in the aggregate; or
2. Where the representative rule is used only for a declaration with regard to common questions, with individual issues regarding liability or damages to be answered in individual claims to be commenced separately (the “bifurcated approach”).[5]

While the Court stated that this was a correct interpretation of the representative rule, I argue that it constitutes an expansive and liberal interpretation that will have a profound effect on England’s collective redress landscape.