Allegations Only · No Settlement Yet
This article describes a class action complaint in the Federal Court of Australia. The statements below are unproven allegations. Google has not been found liable, there is no certified class, and there is nothing to claim at this time. This page is informational and is not legal advice.
An Australian Federal Court class action accuses Google of squeezing local news publishers out of advertising revenue — and Google is fighting back hard, telling the court its ad technology did the opposite. For U.S. readers, this is an international case to watch, not a claim to file.
What Is This About?
A class action in the Federal Court of Australia, Riverine Grazier Pty Ltd v Google LLC [2025] FCA 895, alleges that Google misused its dominant position in digital advertising technology, leaving Australian publishers with less revenue for the ad space they sold. The lead applicant is The Riverine Grazier, a long-running rural newspaper, together with Mornington Peninsula News Group; the proceeding was commenced on February 14, 2025 and is run by law firm Maurice Blackburn.In court filings reported in 2026, Google has pushed back on the allegations, arguing that its adtech products increased competition and publisher revenue rather than blocking rivals, and that the case "ignores the intense competition where ad buyers and sellers have plenty of choice." Google has separately argued that aspects of the applicants' pleadings are ambiguous and that certain claims should be narrowed before it is required to file a defence. The allegations remain unproven and no class has been certified.
What the Publishers Allege
The applicants allege that Google holds a dominant position at multiple points along the advertising technology supply chain — including publisher ad servers, supply-side platforms, demand-side platforms, advertiser ad servers, and ad networks — and that it used that position to its own advantage. The complaint broadly groups the alleged conduct into categories such as Google's pricing and bid-ranking rules, restrictions on rival "header bidding" auctions, the bundling of its tools, and preferential treatment of Google's own ad exchange over competitors. The applicants say the cumulative effect was that Australian publishers received less for their ad inventory than they otherwise would have. Google denies the allegations.Who Would Be Covered
The proceeding is brought on behalf of Australian-domiciled website and app publishers that sold digital display advertising inventory and allegedly lost revenue as a result of Google's conduct. Because this is an Australian "open class" proceeding, it covers eligible Australian publishers without each one having to sign up individually — but it does not extend to U.S. publishers or consumers. The class scope, time period, and any compensation would ultimately be decided by the Federal Court if the case succeeds.The Law-Firm Carriage Fight
Before the case could move forward, two competing class actions and law firms sought to run the litigation. In August 2025, Federal Court Justice Michael O'Bryan granted Maurice Blackburn carriage of the proceeding led by The Riverine Grazier and stayed a rival claim filed by another firm. That rival firm initially sought to appeal but withdrew its application in December 2025, clearing the way for the Maurice Blackburn proceeding to advance.Why It Matters Beyond Australia
The Australian case is part of a broader global wave of legal and regulatory pressure on Google's advertising technology business, including litigation and enforcement action in the United States and Europe. While the outcomes in those forums are separate, publishers and regulators around the world are watching how courts assess the same underlying question: whether Google's control of the adtech "stack" helped or harmed the publishers that depend on it. For U.S. readers, the takeaway is that this is an international development to follow — not a settlement with money to claim.What Happens Next
The parties continue to spar over the scope of the pleadings, and Google has yet to file a full defence. The case must still clear the usual hurdles — pleadings, evidence, and a trial — before any finding of liability or compensation. There is no settlement, no certified U.S. class, and nothing to claim. We will update this page if the Federal Court issues significant rulings or the parties reach a resolution.Frequently Asked Questions
Can I file a claim for this?
No. This is a Federal Court of Australia class action for Australian publishers, not a U.S. settlement. There is no claim form, and nothing to claim anywhere yet — no class has been certified and no settlement has been reached.
What does the case allege?
That Google misused its dominant position across the digital ad technology supply chain, leaving Australian publishers with less revenue for the ad space they sold. The allegations are unproven and Google denies them.
How has Google responded?
Google has rejected the claims, arguing its ad technology increased competition and publisher revenue rather than blocking rivals, and that the case ignores the choice available to ad buyers and sellers. It has also argued aspects of the pleadings are ambiguous and should be narrowed before it files a defence.
Sources
- Riverine Grazier Pty Ltd v Google LLC [2025] FCA 895, Federal Court of Australia.
- Maurice Blackburn — Google AdTech Class Action.
- Global Competition Review — Australian court allows Google adtech class action, stays rival claim.
- AdNews — Google hits back at Riverine Grazier's lawsuit.
Free settlement alerts
Get notified when new class actions open to claims
Join thousands of readers who get the latest class action settlements you may qualify for — delivered straight to your inbox.
