LONDON, Jan 13 (Reuters) - Apple ( AAPL ) has abused its

dominant position by charging app developers an unfair 30%

commission through its App Store, costing British consumers up

to 1.5 billion pounds ($1.8 billion), a London tribunal heard on

Monday.

The U.S. tech company is facing a mass lawsuit brought on

behalf of around 20 million iPhone and iPad users in the United

Kingdom, who were allegedly overcharged for app purchases.

Apple ( AAPL ), however, says the case is meritless and overlooks the

benefits to consumers of the integrated approach of its iOS

operating system, which prioritises security and privacy.

The lawsuit at London's Competition Appeal Tribunal is the

first mass lawsuit against a tech giant to come to trial under

Britain's burgeoning class action-style regime, with many other

cases waiting in the wings.

A similar $1.1 billion case against Google over

the commission it charges app developers for access to its Play

Store begins later in 2025.

Apple ( AAPL ) is facing a separate case brought on behalf of app

developers over its App Store commissions, while Google, Meta

and Amazon ( AMZN ) are also fighting high-value mass

lawsuits in Britain.

'100% MONOPOLY'

Rachael Kent, the British academic bringing the case which

began on Monday, argues Apple ( AAPL ) has made "exorbitant profits" by

excluding all competition for the distribution of apps and

in-app purchases.

This dominant position, her lawyers argue, allows Apple ( AAPL ) to

impose restrictive terms on app developers and charge excessive

commission, which they say is ultimately borne by consumers.

"Apple ( AAPL ) is not just dominant ... it holds a 100% monopoly

position," Kent's lawyer Mark Hoskins said in court filings.

But Apple ( AAPL ) - which has faced mounting pressure from

regulators in the U.S. and Europe over the fees it charges

third-party developers - says 85% of developers do not pay any

commission at all.

The company's lawyer, Marie Demetriou, said in court filings

that the commission reflects "the enormous benefits conferred

through Apple's ( AAPL ) innovation by the iOS ecosystem as a whole".

Kent's case simply ignores Apple's ( AAPL ) intellectual property

rights, Demetriou added, describing the contention that Apple ( AAPL )

must let developers use its technology as they wish as

"expropriation of property rights masquerading as competition".

The seven-week trial is expected to hear evidence from

Apple's ( AAPL ) chief financial officer Kevan Parekh later this week.