The High Court has upheld Ofcom's powers to demand safety data from social media platforms, dismissing a joint challenge by Meta, TikTok and X against the regulator's information notices under the UK's Online Safety Act.
The ruling, handed down on Friday by Lord Justice Singh and Justice Collins Rice, refused permission for the platforms' judicial review claims in the first case to test Ofcom's new powers. The judges found that Ofcom's information-gathering powers served a distinct regulatory purpose and that the individual notices did not legally trigger the threshold for an overarching impact assessment.
The dispute dates to February, when Ofcom issued formal information notices to Meta, TikTok and X requiring them to share detailed data on content and user exposure to harmful material under the Online Safety Act, the law designed to tackle risks to users, including children, of encountering harmful content online. The law gives Ofcom the ability to fine non-compliant platforms up to £18m or 10 per cent of their qualifying global annual turnover, whichever is higher.
The three companies challenged the notices together in a judicial review, largely arguing that the watchdog had unlawfully circumvented the act's specific transparency framework.
An Ofcom spokesperson said it welcomed the High Court's decision to dismiss the challenges, adding that under the Online Safety Act, Parliament had charged the regulator with overseeing an industry that has been unaccountable for more than 20 years. "Gathering information from companies is fundamental to our ability to do our job of assessing compliance with their duties, and we'll continue to use our powers to create a safer life online for people in the UK," the spokesperson said.
A TikTok spokesperson said: "We are considering this judgment." A Meta spokesperson said the company was disappointed with the decision but remained committed to working with Ofcom and was reviewing the judgment in full. X was also approached for comment.
In a separate dispute earlier this month, Meta appeared in the High Court challenging how Ofcom calculates fees and fines under the online safety law, arguing the methods are disproportionate and unlawful. In August, TikTok lost a Court of Appeal bid to overturn a £12.7m fine from the Information Commissioner's Office for illegally processing the data of more than 1.4 million children under the age of 13.
Analysis
Why This Matters
- The ruling is the first judicial review to test Ofcom's new powers under the Online Safety Act, confirming the regulator can demand retrospective safety data from platforms.
- The outcome sets a precedent for how the act is enforced, including the scale of information requests Ofcom may make without conducting a full impact assessment.
- As a major Western online safety regime, the UK approach is closely watched by other jurisdictions considering similar laws.
Background
The Online Safety Act gives Ofcom powers to regulate how platforms deal with harmful content, with fines of up to £18m or 10 per cent of qualifying global turnover. The February notices were among the first major exercises of the regulator's information-gathering authority, and the challenge was the first judicial review of those powers. The platforms argued the requests went beyond what the law's transparency framework allowed; the court disagreed.
Key Perspectives
- Ofcom: Welcomes the decision, saying Parliament has charged it with regulating an industry that has been unaccountable for more than 20 years, and that gathering information is fundamental to assessing compliance.
- TikTok: Is disappointed and considering the judgment.
- Meta: Is disappointed, arguing information-gathering of this scale goes beyond what is necessary or proportionate, but remains committed to working with Ofcom.
What to Watch
- Whether TikTok and the other platforms pursue an appeal against the High Court's decision.
- The outcome of Meta's separate challenge to how Ofcom calculates fees and fines under the act.
- Whether Ofcom expands its information-gathering requests to more platforms or broader categories of data.
Checked
9 claims in this story checked against 1 source: 9 supported.
Show each claim
- SupportedThe High Court rejected the joint challenge by Meta, TikTok and X to Ofcom’s information demands.City AM: “Meta, Tiktok, and X jointly challenged Ofcom with a judicial review case at London’s High Court. ... On Friday, the High Court refused permission for the tech platforms’ claims”
- SupportedThe ruling upheld Ofcom’s information-gathering powers in the first judicial review to test its new powers.City AM: “On Friday, the High Court refused permission for the tech platforms’ claims, in the first judicial review proceedings to test Ofcom’s new powers.”
- SupportedOfcom issued formal information notices to Meta, TikTok and X in February, seeking data on content and user exposure to harmful material.City AM: “In February, Ofcom issued formal information notices to major tech platforms, including Meta, Tiktok, and X, requiring them to share detailed data on content and user exposure to harmful material under the Online Safety Act.”
- SupportedThe judges found Ofcom’s information-gathering powers served a distinct regulatory purpose and that the notices did not trigger the threshold for an overarching impact assessment.City AM: “Lord Justice Singh and Justice Collins Rice found that Ofcom’s information-gathering powers served a distinct regulatory purpose and that the individual notices did not legally trigger the threshold for an overarching impact assessment.”
- SupportedThe Online Safety Act allows Ofcom to fine non-compliant platforms up to £18m or 10 per cent of qualifying global annual turnover, whichever is higher.City AM: “It provided Ofcom with extensive powers, including the ability to fine non-compliant platforms up to £18m or 10 per cent of their qualifying global annual turnover, whichever is higher.”
- SupportedOfcom said Parliament charged it with overseeing an industry that had been unaccountable for more than 20 years.City AM: ““Under the Online Safety Act, Parliament has charged us with the job of regulating an industry that’s been unaccountable for more than 20 years.””
- SupportedA TikTok spokesperson said, “We are considering this judgment.”City AM: “A Tiktok spokesperson said: “We are considering this judgment.””
- SupportedMeta was challenging Ofcom’s calculation of fees and fines in a separate High Court dispute earlier that month.City AM: “Earlier this month, Meta appeared in the High Court , challenging how Ofcom calculates fees and fines under the UK’s online safety law, arguing the methods are disproportionate and unlawful.”
- SupportedIn August, TikTok lost its Court of Appeal bid to overturn a £12.7m fine for illegally processing the data of more than 1.4 million children under 13.City AM: “While in August, Tiktok lost in the Court of Appeal to overturn a £12.7m fine from the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) for illegally processing the data of over 1.4m children under the age of 13.”