A collective voice against a power too big to fight alone.
A class action is a legal tool that allows multiple people to take action together when they have suffered the same type of damage at the hands of a private or public entity.
It is a form of collective justice that allows similar cases to be combined into a single action, preventing each victim from having to face the costs, time, and complexity of an individual trial alone.
Why?
In Italian law, class actions serve to re-establish the balance between the power of large economic entities and the rights of citizens, guaranteeing effective protection even to those who would not have the strength to act alone.
It can take two forms
01
Compensation class action
When financial compensation is sought for the damage suffered.
02The Google case
Injunctive class action
As in the case against Google, when a judge is asked to stop unlawful or harmful conduct that continues to produce negative effects.
Collective justice
+350Class actions filed in Italy since 2010
+40%Increase in class actions brought in the EU
+1,200Class actions filed every year in the USA
When
In short, a class action is the collective voice of citizens when a private power becomes too great to be countered by any single individual. It is an instrument of legal civility and democratic balance: a way to remember that even in the digital world, no one is above the law.
How
The current injunctive class action aims to obtain an order from the Court of Milan requiring Google to modify its de-indexing procedure, obliging Google to carry out a concrete and individualized assessment of each case, examining the specific circumstances, balancing the right to reputation with the freedom of information and clearly giving reasons for any rejection.
We are not asking for compensation, but for a principle: a human interlocutor cannot be missing when evaluating people’s rights.
Q&A
Frequently asked questions
01Has the class action already been filed?
Yes. The collective injunctive action has been filed with the Court of Milan against Google LLC, Google Ireland Limited and Google Italy S.r.l. The initiative was promoted by the law firms LEXIA and OraLex, with the support of the Algopolio association.
02What is the goal of the action?
The goal is to obtain a court order requiring Google to radically overhaul its procedures for handling right-to-be-forgotten requests. It calls for replacing the current system (deemed to be automated, impersonal, and non-compliant with the GDPR) with one that guarantees individual, transparent, and reasoned assessments.
03What do you contest against Google?
According to the plaintiffs, Google rejects de-indexing requests with standardized responses, lacking a genuine analysis of the specific case, without the option to attach documents, and without personalized justifications. In some cases, the requests were rejected even despite specific provisions from the Italian Data Protection Authority requiring their approval.
The result is a system that fails to adequately protect the right to be forgotten and allows false, obsolete, or harmful content to continue to circulate.
04How did it end?
On 5 October 2026 the Court of Milan upheld the collective injunctive action against Google LLC, Google Ireland Limited and Google Italy S.r.l., recognising that the current procedures in fact prevent the exercise of the right to be forgotten under Articles 17 and 21 of the GDPR.
Google must change its procedures and forms by 15 November 2026, with a substantial financial penalty for each day of delay in complying with the order.
05How long did it take?
The action was launched in November 2025 and decided by the Court of Milan on 5 October 2026:
11 December 2025: first hearing and procedural timetable;
26 February 2026: chamber hearing on the merits;
5 October 2026: the injunctive action is upheld;
15 November 2026: deadline for Google to adapt its procedures and forms.
06What did the Court order Google to do?
With its decision of 5 October 2026 the Court ordered Google to:
change the procedures and forms available to users, allowing them to attach documentation in support of their de-indexing request;
give reasons for any refusal based on an assessment of the documents submitted by the data subject, so that the reasons can be understood immediately and effectively.
The Court also issued the order against Google LLC, overcoming the objection of lack of jurisdiction raised by its defence.
07What will change for citizens?
Once Google has adapted its procedures, anyone requesting de-indexing will be able to:
fully present their case;
attach the necessary documentation in support of the request;
understand immediately and effectively the reasons for any refusal.
This change directly affects the protection of digital dignity, with a relevance that may extend to all users in the Union.
08Does the class action provide for financial compensation?
No.
This is an injunctive action, aimed at stopping an illegality deemed systemic. Any damages actions may be initiated separately.
09Why do you speak of urgency?
Because every day that harmful content remains online causes new harm. Without individualized assessment, prejudice renews and amplifies, transforming false or outdated information into a sort of “permanent label” that is difficult to remove.
10Are there European precedents supporting your position?
Yes. The Court of Justice of the European Union has repeatedly held that search engines must ensure effective protection of the right to de-referencing and cannot limit themselves to generic or automated responses when fundamental rights such as dignity, honour, and reputation are at stake.
We only use technical cookies. Visit statistics are our own and cookie-free: they cannot recognise you from one day to the next, there is no profiling, and you can turn them off at any time. Cookie Policy
