UK app developers are poised to receive compensation for alleged revenue losses caused by commissions charged on Google Play Store transactions.
The £260m settlement, if approved, would be the largest settlement secured under the UK’s collective action regime.
It arises from an opt-out collective action against Google on behalf of thousands of UK app developers brought by Barry Rodger, a professor of law at the University of Strathclyde.
The settlement comprises a £160m pot for eligible developers and £100m to meet funding, legal and other costs associated with the litigation.
Rodger, a leading competition law academic and the class representative, alleged that Google abused its dominant position to the detriment of thousands of UK businesses selling apps through the Play Store to Android customers.
The claim sought compensation for losses suffered by those businesses, many of them small enterprises, from August 2018. The Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) will consider the settlement for approval at a hearing on 15 September 2026.
The amount received by each eligible developer that submits a valid claim will depend on its qualifying Play Store sales.
Rodger said: “For thousands of UK app developers, many of them small businesses, the Play Store is the only realistic route to their customers – and they had little choice but to pay Google's commission. This settlement is a great outcome for them. If approved, meaningful financial compensation will become available for businesses that could never have taken on a company like Google alone.”
Damien Geradin, founding partner of Geradin Partners, which advised the claimant class, said the agreement “reflects the valuable role that the UK’s collective proceedings regime can play in securing redress for class members”.
He added that the settlement “should see money getting into developers’ hands less than three years after the claim was filed”.
The settlement follows the certification and grant of a collective proceedings order (CPO) in May 2025, which formally authorised Rodger as class representative and certified the case as an opt-out collective action.
Google later sought to require some large developers to opt into the proceedings rather than remain in the opt-out class. The CAT rejected the application, finding that Google could have advanced its arguments earlier and that varying certification at that stage risked derailing the September trial.
The claimant class was represented by Robert O'Donoghue KC of Brick Court Chambers, Daniel Carall-Green of Fountain Court Chambers and Bethanie Chambers of XXIV Old Buildings. Bench Walk Advisors funded the proceedings.
The defendants were Alphabet Inc. and Google subsidiaries in the US, UK, Ireland and Asia-Pacific, including Google Commerce and Google Payment. Josh Holmes KC and Kassie Smith KC of Monckton Chambers acted for them, together with various juniors, as instructed by RPC.
RPC declined to comment, referring to Google, which issued a statement saying that it was “pleased to reach an agreement with the developers to end this litigation, subject to court approval”.
It added: “We remain committed to supporting the UK developer community in building the next generation of digital experiences.”
The draft settlement agreement stated that Google did not accept that class members had suffered loss as alleged and made “no admission of liability or wrongdoing”.
The agreement, if approved, would mark Google’s second settlement in closely related Play Store litigation before the CAT, following a confidential settlement with Epic Games in March.
A third claim, brought by class representative Liz Coll, a consumer rights campaigner, on behalf of around 20 million UK Android users, is set to continue.
Coll, represented by Hausfeld’s London office, said her claim was unaffected and would proceed to trial in October. Valued at around £1bn, it represents a substantially larger class than Rodger’s claim.
Her claim alleges that Google abused its dominant position by charging developers an excessive 30% commission on digital purchases, which was passed on to consumers.
Coll said: "Rodger’s settlement is good news for app developers, and shows the CAT’s collective proceedings regime is working, but it doesn’t address the harm done to millions of consumers using the Play Store. My claim seeks redress for them, and we’re focused on the trial in October and holding Google accountable for breaking competition law and leaving consumers out of pocket.”
In May last year, the CAT approved a £200m settlement in the landmark collective action brought by Walter Merricks against Mastercard, concluding nearly a decade of litigation over interchange fees. The CAT said the settlement was “just and reasonable”, despite being significantly lower than the original £16bn claim.
Email your news and story ideas to: [email protected]
