Yesterday, the Amsterdam District Court declared the Foundation for the Protection of Privacy Interests (SBP) and the Foundation for Mass Damage & Consumers (SMC) both admissible in the class action lawsuits they each filed against Google in the Autumn of 2023.

SBP contends that Google generates billions of euros annually by infringing user privacy. It claims that data from users of Google Search, Google Chrome, Google Maps, YouTube, Gmail, and Android device owners is processed without their consent. According to the foundation, this encompasses location information, browsing habits, and application usage.

SMC asserts that studies indicate Google gathers highly detailed information from Android users. The company knows exactly which applications are utilized, the timing of their use, and numerous specifics regarding users’ personal lives.

Both foundations accuse Google of breaching Dutch and European data protection and consumer legislation. They allege that the technology giant collects personal data from users on a vast scale through its services and products without obtaining the necessary permissions. Furthermore, Google is said to share this data, including sensitive personal information, with numerous third parties via its online advertising platform.

Additionally, Google has been accused of transferring personal data to countries outside of Europe, such as the United States, without offering adequate safeguards, including against potential surveillance by the U.S. government. These practices are claimed to infringe upon Dutch consumers’ fundamental right to privacy.

SBP is seeking non-material damages of 750 euros per user, plus material damages. Meanwhile, SMC notes that while the precise material and non-material damages require further assessment, non-material damages in other cases in the Netherlands have resulted in awards ranging from 100 to 17,804 euros per person.

The primary considerations of the Amsterdam District Court are as follows:

The alleged privacy violations commenced before 15 November 2016 and have persisted since then. Consequently, the WAMCA also applies to infringements occurring before this date. By choosing to maintain its policies after 15 November 2016, Google has accepted its potential liability under the new legislation. (The legislative proposal was presented to Parliament on 15 November 2016, so potential defendants may have only become aware of the new collective action right established by the WAMCA from that date onward.)

The commonality requirement has been satisfied. Each user of a Google service or product has the potential for their personal data to have been processed by Google, resulting in a loss of control over that data. This indicates that all Google users are in a comparable position.

While claims for non-material damages pertain specifically to individual cases and the persons involved, this does not negate the assumption of similarity. Otherwise, the provision introduced by the WAMCA for collective damage claims would be rendered ineffective, according to the court.

Jurjen Lemstra, Tilly Alberga-Smits, and Martijn van Dam from Lemstra Van der Korst assist SBP. Gerrit-Jan Zwenne and Lars Groeneveld from Pels Rijcken also represent the foundation.

Frank Peters, Maxime Eljon, and Jacob van de Velde (Rubicon Impact & Litigation) represent SMC.

Eaton Hall Funding LLC finances the lawsuit initiated by SMC. Should the court order Google to pay damages or if a settlement is reached, the litigation funder will receive 17.5 percent of the total proceeds.

The case brought by SBP is funded by Lieff Cabraser Heimann & Bernstein LLP, which will be entitled to compensation ranging from 18 to 25 percent of the amount payable by Google, obviously contingent upon a successful outcome.