A new legal action claims that Apple and Amazon agreed on a private deal that led to higher prices for Apple products across the UK. The claim was filed at the Competition Appeal Tribunal in London in December and targets events that started in October 2018. The case asks for more than £900 million in compensation.
The filing says the two companies agreed to limit how many independent sellers could list Apple goods on Amazon’s marketplace. After that deal, Amazon sold Apple items mainly through its own retail account. Apple, in return, gave Amazon better wholesale prices.
The case says shoppers lost out because fewer sellers meant fewer discounts. Prices went up across a long list of Apple goods, from iPhones to accessories. Hausfeld & Co LLP acts as the competition law firm backing the action.
Who Is Bringing The Claim And Who Could Benefit?
UK consumers are represented through a collective action led by Justin Le Patourel. He previously led a case against BT over landline charges and worked as a consumer policy lead at Ofcom. He acts through JLP A&A Class Representative Limited, supported by Hausfeld & Co LLP.
The claim covers more than 10 million people who bought new Apple products in the UK from October 2018 onwards. Purchases made through Amazon, Apple stores, Curry’s and other retailers fall within the class. Mobile phone contracts linked to network operators do not fall within the claim.
The action runs on an opt out basis. Every eligible UK buyer joins automatically unless they choose to leave the case. The Competition Appeal Tribunal rules allow this type of action where many buyers face the same alleged harm.
A similar claim was brought in 2023 through Professor Christine Riefa. The Tribunal did not allow that case to go to trial, though it raised no issue around the underlying consumer claims.
More from News
- The UK Public Does Not Trust Tech Companies, Reports Find
- Uber Eats Will Now Be Using Robot Delivery Services In The UK
- African Startups Secured Over $3 Billion In Funding In 2025
- Warner Bros. Becomes The Piggy In The Middle As Netflix And Paramount Battle For Ownership
- Why Do 57% Of UK Founders Say The EU Is Better For Growth Than Britain
- What Checkout Options Should Ecommerce Businesses Use In 2026?
- Why Is Reddit Going Against Australia’s Social Media Ban?
- How Is Nvidia Managing Chip Smuggling?
Why Does The Claim Say Prices Went Up?
According to the filing, the 2018 agreement forced almost all independent Apple sellers off Amazon’s marketplace from January 2019. That change cut down discounted listings and left shoppers facing full prices more often.
The case says Apple gained from higher selling prices across the UK. Amazon also gained because it sold more Apple goods directly at higher margins. The claim links this pattern to the market power held through the two companies.
Italian and Spanish competition authorities already ruled that similar agreements broke EU competition law in those countries. The claim says early economic work points to the same outcome in the UK, using data reviewed through Mr Le Patourel’s team.
Justin Le Patourel said millions of shoppers relied on the two companies without knowing about the alleged deal. He said customers paid more and had fewer choices as a result. Scott Campbell from Hausfeld & Co LLP said the firm looks forward to holding the companies to account and securing compensation for UK buyers.
Apple and Amazon rank among the five largest companies in the world through market value. The case says that scale allowed the agreement to work against ordinary shoppers. The Tribunal will now decide whether the claim can move ahead through the UK courts. Justin Le Patourel, the proposed class representative in the action, said:
“Millions of UK consumers rely on Apple and Amazon for their tech products, unaware that the two companies may have been secretly colluding to make them pay more and reduce their choice. Big businesses should compete fairly, not strike secret deals that leave customers out of pocket.
“Apple and Amazon are two of the five largest companies in the world by market value. These gigantic businesses have misused their power to shut out competition from independent merchants – unlawfully lining their wallets at the expense of UK consumers. It’s a betrayal of their customers’ trust.
“I’m delighted to be leading this new claim on behalf of UK consumers. The merits of the case have always been strong. The Tribunal’s earlier refusal to certify the previous claim had nothing to do with the core allegations, which remain compelling and unanswered.”
