Google Play Store UK Class Action, £1.2 Billion Consumer Claim Goes to Trial

Google is defending a major UK consumer competition case over how it operates the Google Play Store, with a claim reported at about £1.2 billion.

The case was brought by Elizabeth Helen “Liz” Coll on behalf of UK consumers and businesses. It alleges that Google used its position in the Android ecosystem to restrict competing ways of distributing apps and processing payments, allowing it to charge commissions of up to 30% that were allegedly excessive and unfair, and that those costs were passed on to consumers through higher prices.

The case is being heard by the UK Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) in London. The tribunal’s official diary lists the trial as beginning October 6, 2026, with an estimated length of eight weeks.

This is not a newly filed or proposed class action. The CAT issued a Collective Proceedings Order in September 2022, allowing the case to proceed on an opt-out basis.

There is no settlement, no claim form, and no consumer payment. The £1.2 billion is the amount being sought in the litigation, not money Google has agreed to pay.

Quick Facts: Coll v Alphabet / Google Play Store UK Class Action

Detail	Information
Case	Elizabeth Helen Coll v Alphabet Inc. and Others
Case number	1408/7/7/21
Tribunal	UK Competition Appeal Tribunal, London
Class representative	Elizabeth Helen Coll
Defendants	Alphabet Inc., Google LLC, Google Ireland Limited, Google Commerce Limited, Google Payment Limited
Legal basis	Section 18, Competition Act 1998; Article 102 TFEU for the pre-Brexit period
Issue	Alleged abuse of dominant position in Android app distribution and Google Play payment processing
Commission at issue	Alleged commissions of up to 30%
Class status	Collective Proceedings Order granted September 9, 2022 (opt-out for UK-domiciled class members)
Estimated class size	Approximately 19.5 million consumers and businesses (certification estimate)
Claim period	Approximately October 2015 to July 31, 2026
Trial	Began October 6, 2026; estimated eight weeks
Damages sought	Reported at approximately £1.2 billion
Settlement	None
Claim form	None
Current payment	None

What Liz Coll Alleges About Google Play Store Fees

The CAT’s 2022 certification judgment describes allegations involving three connected areas: licensing of smart mobile operating systems, distribution of Android apps through Google Play, and payment processing through Google Play.

The claim alleges that Google’s technical and contractual restrictions made it difficult for developers to distribute apps through alternative channels or use competing payment systems, helping Google maintain its position and charge commissions on in-app purchases, app sales, and subscriptions. These are allegations that must be proved at trial. The CAT has not found Google liable in the consumer case.

How Google Play Commissions Could Affect Consumers

The consumer claim rests on an alleged “pass-through” theory. When a consumer pays for digital content in an Android app, Google takes a commission. The claim alleges developers passed at least some of that cost on through higher prices.

If the tribunal accepts that theory and finds Google liable, damages would be based on the loss suffered by class members, not simply on Google’s total commissions. The amount would depend on the tribunal’s findings about Google’s conduct, the size of any overcharge, and how much was passed through to consumers.

How Much Is the Claim Worth?

The headline figure is approximately £1.2 billion, but that is not a guaranteed payout. The amount has changed as the claim period and damages evidence developed. At certification in 2022, the tribunal recorded a preliminary aggregate-loss estimate of approximately £263 million to £752 million, excluding interest. The current figure reflects the later stage of the case and the longer period now pursued.

Even if the claim succeeds, consumers would not each receive an equal share of £1.2 billion. The tribunal would need to decide liability and damages and approve how any award is distributed.

Who Is Included in the Collective Action?

The case runs under the UK’s collective-action system. For qualifying UK-domiciled class members, inclusion is automatic on an opt-out basis, and they do not need to file an individual lawsuit unless they validly opt out. Non-UK-domiciled people must opt in. The precise class definition is governed by the tribunal’s orders, so not every purchase made on an Android phone automatically qualifies.

Opting out is not the same as filing a claim. Someone who validly opts out generally would not be bound by the collective proceedings and may keep the ability to pursue an individual claim, subject to law and limitation periods. Anyone considering that should seek independent legal advice.

Is There a Claim Form?

No. The case is still being tried, and no compensation distribution process exists. This differs from U.S. settlements, where consumers usually submit a claim form. Be wary of websites claiming Google is already paying £60 or another fixed amount per person. The tribunal has not ordered any fixed consumer payment, and per-person figures you may see reported are estimates from dividing potential damages.

What This Means for U.S. Consumers

This is a UK proceeding under UK competition law. U.S. residents are not part of the UK class, and there is no U.S. claim form or U.S. payout arising from it. Separate U.S. litigation exists independently, such as the settlement covered in AllAboutLawyer’s article on the Google Play $700 million antitrust settlement, which was approved by a federal court in California and involves U.S. consumers. Receiving or qualifying for that payment has no bearing on eligibility in the UK case.

Why Google Is Fighting the Claim

Google disputes the allegations. It argues that Android gives consumers and developers real alternatives, including other app stores, that its fees should be viewed in the context of competition in mobile ecosystems, and that the Play Store provides security and safety benefits. Google is defending the case at trial rather than settling. The tribunal will decide the legal and economic issues on the evidence.

Consumer Case vs. the £260 Million Developer Settlement

A separate proceeding, brought by Professor Barry Rodger (Case No. 1673/7/7/24), represented UK app developers over commissions charged to them. That case settled for £260 million, approved by the CAT in September 2026.

The developer settlement does not resolve the Coll consumer case. The CAT treats the two as separate proceedings, although they have been jointly case-managed for much of the litigation.

What Happens Next

The trial continues before the CAT. The tribunal will consider evidence on Google’s market position, the alleged restrictions on app distribution and payments, the commission structure, and the alleged financial effect on consumers. It must decide whether Google breached competition law and, if so, what loss resulted.

If the consumer claim succeeds, further proceedings may be needed to determine damages and how any award is distributed. If Google prevails on the relevant claims, consumers would receive nothing through this case. A judgment is not expected until after the trial concludes.

What Google Play Users Should Do Now

There is no claim form to complete. If you may fall within the UK class, keep records of relevant purchases:

• Google Play receipts
• Invoices for paid apps
• In-app purchase records
• Subscription receipts
• Google account transaction history showing dates and amounts

Key Dates

Date	Development
July 29, 2021	Coll’s collective proceedings commenced
July 18, 2022	CAT hears the certification application
August 31, 2022	CAT issues its certification judgment, [2022] CAT 39
September 9, 2022	Collective Proceedings Order made
May 15, 2024	CAT orders part consolidation with the separate Epic Games proceedings
March 24, 2025	CAT orders joint case management of the Coll, Epic, and Rodger proceedings
April 21, 2026	CAT rejects Coll’s application for additional Google Play transaction data (February 2024 to January 2026)
July 31, 2026	Pre-trial review
September 2026	CAT approves the £260 million developer (Rodger) settlement
October 6, 2026	Trial begins; estimated eight weeks

Frequently Asked Questions

Is the Google Play Store UK lawsuit a certified class action? 

Yes. In UK terminology it is a certified collective proceeding, with a Collective Proceedings Order made on September 9, 2022.

What is the case number?

 1408/7/7/21, Elizabeth Helen Coll v Alphabet Inc. and Others, before the Competition Appeal Tribunal.

Who is Elizabeth Helen Coll?

 Elizabeth Helen “Liz” Coll is the class representative bringing the case on behalf of affected UK consumers and businesses.

What does the lawsuit allege?

 That Google abused dominant positions through restrictions on Android app distribution and payment processing and charged commissions alleged to be excessive and unfair.

How much is Google being sued for?

 The claim is reported at approximately £1.2 billion. That is a damages claim, not a settlement or guaranteed payout.

Could every eligible UK consumer receive £60? 

No. Reported per-person figures are estimates, and the CAT has not ordered any fixed payment.

Do I need to submit a claim form?

 No. The case is still at trial and no claims process exists.

Has Google settled the consumer lawsuit?

 No. Only the separate UK developer case settled, for £260 million.

Are U.S. consumers included?

 No. This is a UK proceeding, and there is no U.S. claim form arising from it.

Is the trial happening now?

 Yes. It began October 6, 2026, with an estimated length of eight weeks.

Will Google automatically pay UK Play users?

 No. Any compensation would depend on the trial outcome and a later tribunal-approved distribution process.

Bottom Line

Coll v Alphabet is one of the UK’s largest consumer competition cases against a digital platform. The collective proceedings were certified in 2022, and the trial began October 6, 2026. The central question is whether Google’s conduct in the Android ecosystem allowed it to impose excessive and unfair commissions that were passed on to UK consumers.

The £1.2 billion figure is the amount claimed, not money awarded. For now, the case is active, Google denies the allegations, and there is no consumer settlement, no claim form, and no guaranteed payment. The next major development will be the tribunal’s decision on liability and damages, followed by any process to distribute an award to eligible class members.

Sources

• UK Competition Appeal Tribunal, Elizabeth Helen Coll v Alphabet Inc. and Others, Case No. 1408/7/7/21: https://www.catribunal.org.uk/cases/14087721-elizabeth-helen-coll
• UK Competition Appeal Tribunal, [2022] CAT 39, Judgment (Certification): https://www.catribunal.org.uk/judgments/14087721-elizabeth-helen-coll-v-alphabet-inc-and-others-judgment-certification-2022-cat
• UK Competition Appeal Tribunal, [2025] CAT 25, Judgment (Joint case management): https://www.catribunal.org.uk/judgments/16737724-14087721-13785720-professor-barry-rodger-v-alphabet-inc-and-others-coll-v-google
• UK Competition Appeal Tribunal, Reasoned Order (Updated Transaction Data), April 21, 2026: https://www.catribunal.org.uk/sites/cat/files/2026-04/14087721%20Elizabeth%20Helen%20Coll%20v%20Alphabet%20Inc.%20and%20Others%20-%20Reasoned%20Order%20%28Updated%20Transaction%20Data%29%20%2021%20Apr%202026%20%20.pdf
• UK Competition Appeal Tribunal, Professor Barry Rodger v Alphabet Inc. and Others, Case No. 1673/7/7/24: https://www.catribunal.org.uk/cases/16737724-professor-barry-rodger
• UK Competition Appeal Tribunal, official diary (October 2026 trial listing): https://www.catribunal.org.uk/diary

Researched and written by Israr Ahmad, Legal Content Researcher.

This article is for informational purposes only and is not legal advice. AllAboutLawyer.com is a consumer legal information site, not a law firm, and does not provide legal representation. UK tribunal decisions and orders are the authoritative source for this proceeding. Readers with questions about potential claims should consult a licensed attorney or solicitor.