Lloyd v Google LLC [2018] EWHC 2599 (QB) (08 October 2018)

Lloyd v Google LLC [2018] EWHC 2599 (QB) (08 October 2018)

The claim discloses no basis for seeking compensation under the DPA because the pleaded facts do not allege any material damage or distress, and the asserted categories of 'damage' (infringement of rights, commission of the wrong, loss of control) do not amount to compensatable harm under DPA s 13. The statutory scheme requires proof of damage resulting from the contravention, not merely the contravention itself. Accordingly, permission to serve out of the jurisdiction is refused.

Citation
[2018] EWHC 2599 (QB)
Parties
Claimant: Richard Lloyd; Defendant: Google LLC
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
08 October 2018
Procedural Posture
Application for Permission to Serve Out of Jurisdiction (representative Action) / High Court Judgment on Application for Permission to Serve Proceedings on Foreign Defendant
Outcome
Permission to serve out of the jurisdiction refused; claim dismissed.
Legal Topics
Representative Actions, Compensation for Data Breach, Jurisdiction, Interpretation of 'damage' Under DPA 1998
Data Protection Tort Civil Procedure Representative Actions Compensation for Data Breach Jurisdiction Interpretation of 'damage' Under DPA 1998

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 23 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Richard Lloyd

Claimant

Google LLC

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Application for Permission to Serve Out of Jurisdiction (representative Action) / High Court Judgment on Application for Permission to Serve Proceedings on Foreign Defendant

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the pleaded facts disclose any basis for claiming compensation under the Data Protection Act 1998 (DPA)
  2. 2 Whether the Court should permit the claim to continue as a representative action under CPR 19.6

Ratio Decidendi

The claim discloses no basis for seeking compensation under the DPA because the pleaded facts do not allege any material damage or distress, and the asserted categories of 'damage' (infringement of rights, commission of the wrong, loss of control) do not amount to compensatable harm under DPA s 13. The statutory scheme requires proof of damage resulting from the contravention, not merely the contravention itself. Accordingly, permission to serve out of the jurisdiction is refused.

Court Disposition

Permission to serve out of the jurisdiction refused; claim dismissed.

Orders

  • Permission to serve proceedings on Google LLC out of the jurisdiction is refused.
  • Claim is dismissed.