Does the claim fall within the scope of Item 1 of the Second Addendum
- As is well known, in accordance with the provisions of section 3(a) of the Class Actions Law: "A class action shall not be filed except in a claim as detailed in the Second Addendum..."
- The motion was filed by virtue of Item 1 of the Second Addendum to the Class Actions Law. The Respondent argued that this is not the following claim within the scope of Item 1.
- For the sake of completeness, it should be noted that from the outset, the application for approval was also filed for grounds related to competition law. In this context, Item 4 applies , which deals with a claim on cause of action under the Economic Competition Law. It is not superfluous to note that even if this ground had remained, it would have been necessary to examine whether the application for approval fell within the scope of Item 1, as claimed by the Applicant in relation to the other grounds, since it would not have been possible to discuss these grounds without them falling within the scope of any of the details in the Second Appendix to the Law.
- This is the wording of Item 1 of the Second Addendum:
"1. A lawsuit against a dealer, as defined inthe Consumer Protection Law, in connection with a matter between him and a customer, whether or not they entered into a transaction."
- In our case, the lawsuit was filed against the respondent on behalf of "any person or entity that is not registered as users of Facebook..." This means in the name of those who are not its customers. Therefore, the question arises as to how, according to the Applicant, the application for approval falls within the scope of Item 1?
- All that is argued in the application for approval in this context is that the respondents are a "dealer" and that activity in the matters discussed in the application for approval is like a business vis-à-vis consumers, and that the applicant and the general public are customers/consumers (section 216 onwards of the application for approval).
In the framework of the response to the Respondent's response, in response to the Respondent's arguments that the application for approval does not fall within the scope of Item 1, the Applicant elaborated further on this matter. The Applicant claimed that Facebook is a business and that it declares that it will use the information for business purposes, whether to monitor and examine the usefulness of advertisements or to send advertisements or offers to become a member of Facebook. It was further argued as follows: