Robertson (Appellant) v Google LLC (Respondent)

Case summary

Case ID

UKSC/2025/0187

Parties

Appellant(s)

Colin Robertson

Respondent(s)

Google LLC

Issue

Does the failure to file and serve a notice identifying the grounds on which the claimant is entitled to serve the claim form out of the jurisdiction, as required under Rule 6.34(1) of the Civil Procedure Rules (“CPR”), render the service of the claim form invalid? Can the Court give retrospective permission under Rule 6.34(2)(b) to validate service of a claim form outside the jurisdiction where the claimant has not complied with Rule 6.34(1)?

Facts

Google LLC (“Google”) is a company in the United States of America (“USA”) which owns an online video-sharing platform called YouTube. Mr Colin Robertson (“Mr Robertson”) was a content creator who uploaded YouTube videos to his channel “Millennial Woes”. Mr Robertson accepted YouTube’s Terms of Service, pursuant to which he was able to monetise video content. On 22 February 2021, Google terminated Mr Roberton’s YouTube channel and imposed a ban from YouTube. Google stated that Mr Robertson’s videos had violated YouTube’s hate speech policies. On 7 October 2021, Mr Robertson issued a claim form against Google. This alleged that Google’s actions amounted to unlawful belief discrimination contrary to section 29 of the Equality Act 2010 and were a breach of contract. The claim form had to be served on Google in the USA within 6 months under Rule 7.5(2), namely by 7 April 2022. The claim form was served on Google on 5 April 2022. However, Mr Roberston failed the file or serve Form N510 as required by Rule 6.34(1). Form N510 is a notice identifying the grounds on which the claimant is entitled to serve the claim form out of the jurisdiction. By letter on 19 April 2022, Google said that no valid service had taken place as Mr Robertson had failed to comply with Rule 6.34(1). On 22 April 2022, Mr Robertson in response filed Form N510 with the court along with an application for relief from sanctions. The County Court granted Mr Robertson relief from sanctions under Rule 3.9 in respect of his failure to file and serve Form N510. The County Court also granted retrospective permission to file and serve the claim form without Form N510 and declared that the claim form had been served on 5 April 2022. Google appealed to the Court of Appeal where it was held that the relief from sanctions regime does not apply. Instead, Rule 7.6 governs extensions of time for service. Mr Robertson had conceded that he was unable to meet the test under Rule 7.6(3) for an extension of time. The Court of Appeal therefore allowed Google’s appeal. Mr Robertson now appeals to the Supreme Court.

Date of issue

11 November 2025

Case origin

PTA

Permission to Appeal

Justices

Lord Hodge

Lord Sales

Lady Rose

Permission to Appeal decision date

17 December 2025

Permission to Appeal decision

Refused

The application does not raise an arguable point of law.

Back to top