Reining in Apple: Kent v Apple and the evolution of collective competition enforcement in digital markets in the UK

... Kent potentially represents a watershed moment for the English collective proceedings (CPO) regime and digital market enforcement in the UK. Doctor Rachael Kent’s claim on behalf of roughly 36 million UK consumers alleged that Apple abused its dominant position in iOS distribution and in-app payment services, charging excessive commissions and imposing exclusionary restrictions. Importantly, the case engaged not just the question of market power in digital ecosystems—a topic very much at the forefront of the modern antitrust enforcement debate—but also the credibility of the UK’s CPO regime in managing large-scale, data-intensive litigation and ultimately delivering for consumers. This article seeks to trace the history of the UK CPO regime, including exploring its purposes and how it was developed. The focus will be on the details of the Kent judgment (which stands at a sizeable 396 pages), exploring the arguments testing the boundaries of dominance and abuse in a ‘Big Tech’ platform context. Particular attention will be paid to the Competition Appeal Tribunal’s (CAT’s) rejection of Apple’s arguments around ecosystem competition.