A British Columbia court has certified a class action against Apple over the Google search deal on its devices. The class covers everyone in Canada who has bought Google search ads since 2005, and Apple is now the only company being sued.
Justice Thomas of the Supreme Court of British Columbia certified the case on November 6, and 9to5Mac reported on the ruling. Certification only lets the claim move forward as a group case, and it does not decide whether Apple broke Canadian competition law.
The class action against Apple covers every Canadian Google search ad buyer
The plaintiff is Spark Event Rentals, an event rental company in Pemberton, British Columbia. The class counts any ad shown on a search results page in response to a query. Ads on specialized search engines, such as travel booking sites, are left out.
Spark says Google became the default search engine in Safari around 2005, with the deal reaching iPhone in 2007 and Siri and Spotlight in 2016. In return Google shared part of its search ad revenue with Apple, and Spark alleges Apple agreed not to build its own search engine. Spark claims the arrangement let Google charge advertisers more than a competitive market would have allowed.
Spark first sued Google as well. Justice Thomas stayed that part of the case in 2023 so the dispute could go to arbitration under the contract Spark signed to buy Google ads. Spark dropped Google instead and continues against Apple Inc. and Apple Canada Inc.
Apple called itself a bystander, and the conspiracy claim still proceeds
Apple’s lawyers argued that Google is the real target and that Apple is an innocent bystander with no duty to give rival search engines default placement. They also said the deal is an ordinary distribution agreement that Canadian competition law allows.
Justice Thomas ruled that it is not clear the claim must fail. He said the claim goes beyond a distribution deal because it alleges Apple agreed not to compete in search in return for billions of dollars in revenue share, and he took the size of those payments as an indication of market power.
The claim rests on section 45 of the Competition Act. Justice Thomas also found a basis for the unlawful means conspiracy, unjust enrichment, fraudulent concealment and Quebec Civil Code claims, and he approved punitive damages as an issue the court can decide for the whole class.
Much of Spark’s evidence comes from the antitrust case against Google in the United States, including testimony from Apple executives Eddy Cue and John Giannandrea. In that case the Department of Justice and 40 state attorneys general won a ruling that Google’s agreements with Apple broke the Sherman Act, although Apple was not a party. Evidence in that case put the Safari default search payments at $20 billion in 2022.
The case now moves to discovery and damages
Justice Thomas accepted the list of common issues Spark proposed and its plan for notifying class members. He described the litigation plan as a work in progress that will be adjusted as the case moves forward.
The customer records that identify class members sit with Google, not Apple. Justice Thomas said Spark can obtain them from Google Canada through the court’s general powers to notify the class, and noted that the United States District Court may be involved in discovery for data Google holds in the United States.
