Apple Faces $2.7 Billion UK Lawsuit Claiming App Tracking Rules Favored Its Own Ads

Apple faced another lawsuit over its privacy rules on Thursday. This one seeks £2 billion ($2.7 billion) from thousands of app developers in the UK.

The suit was filed at London's Competition Appeal Tribunal by ATT Collective Action Limited, according to Reuters. It's led by Ann Pope, a former senior director for antitrust at Britain's Competition and Markets Authority, working with the law firm Hausfeld.

The claim: Apple's App Tracking Transparency system, launched in April 2021, forced third-party developers through a stricter consent process than Apple used for its own advertising operations. That, the suit alleges, gave Apple's ad business an unfair edge while squeezing revenue from developers who depend on personalized ads to keep their apps running.

"The ATT policy was implemented without the transparency and objectivity you would expect from a company in Apple's position, and it resulted in very significant harm to businesses that depend on Apple as a gatekeeper," Pope said in a statement reported by Quartz. "Privacy is an important protection for consumers, but it should be applied fairly and in a way that ensures businesses of all sizes can compete on a level playing field."

Hausfeld says roughly 70% of the UK developers affected employ 10 or fewer people. These are small businesses, not tech giants, and the firm argues they've been squeezed by App Store commissions, payment restrictions, and now ATT on top of it.

Apple's Defense

Apple said it is "bound by the exact same requirements as all developers."

There's a real explanation behind that claim. As 9to5Mac laid out, Apple's own apps don't show the ATT prompt because, according to Apple, they don't collect the specific cross-app tracking data the prompt covers in the first place. Third-party apps that don't collect that data are equally exempt from showing it. Apple's argument is that the rule only kicks in when you're doing the thing ATT is designed to flag, and Apple says it isn't doing that thing with its own services.

That defense hasn't satisfied regulators. Germany's Federal Cartel Office concluded last month that Apple's ATT pop-ups "had the potential to encourage users to give their consent, whereas they had the potential to discourage consent for third-party apps," according to Engadget. Apple agreed to redesign the prompts, and those changes are set to roll out across most other EU markets too, per Quartz.

Italy fined Apple more than €98.6 million over ATT in December, and France hit the company with a €150 million penalty in April 2025, according to Quartz. Poland and Romania have also examined the framework, per the Epoch Times.

Apple Before the UK Tribunal

This is the third ATT-related case Apple has faced before the UK's Competition Appeal Tribunal, according to 9to5Mac. Apple lost the first one, a roughly £1.5 billion ruling over App Store commissions handed down last October, and is currently appealing it, per MacRumors. A second case is still working through the tribunal.

Apple isn't the only tech giant facing pressure at this venue. Alphabet, Google's parent, settled a separate £260 million class action at the same tribunal last month over claims it overcharged Android developers, according to Silicon Republic's reporting cited by Quartz.

One detail worth flagging: Pope, the woman leading this new suit, used to be a senior official at the very regulator, the CMA, whose jurisdiction touches these issues. That's a notable structural detail about who's driving UK antitrust litigation against Big Tech, not an allegation of wrongdoing on her part, and none of the sources suggest impropriety.

The lawsuit still has to clear a basic hurdle before any money changes hands. MacRumors reports the claim needs to be certified by the tribunal before it can proceed as a class action. That certification fight, not the £2 billion headline number, is the next thing to watch. Apple has not indicated whether it will contest certification, fight the claim on the merits, or both.