MLex: EU investigators probing TikTok’s handling of under-13s’ access to its platform are preparing to charge the ByteDance-owned company with violations of EU law, MLex has learned. However, it's understood that the company and the EU executive are still negotiating, and the case could come to an end if TikTok presents convincing commitments.

MLex: TikTok has joined Meta Platforms in challenging a fee it must pay to the European Commission to fund enforcement of the EU Digital Services Act (EU DSA), the EU’s landmark content-moderation law. The video-sharing platform confirmed that it has filed a case at the EU’s lower-tier General Court, saying it disagrees with the way the fee has been calculated. Meta too has argued that the way the fee is calculated is unfair.

MLex: TikTok has lost a UK Upper Tribunal (UT) appeal on a preliminary issue in its challenge to a privacy fine over its processing of data belonging to children under 13. The judges rejected the platform’s argument that its data processing was protected as being for journalistic, academic, artistic or literary purposes, and ruled that it was not enough for the processing merely to facilitate the dissemination of such material. The finding means the Information Commissioner’s Office didn’t have to satisfy special-purposes preconditions (including obtaining court approval) before it fined TikTok £12.7 million. The case will return to the First-tier Tribunal (FTT) for the remaining substantive issues in TikTok’s appeal.

MLex: TikTok is ramping up its efforts to tackle misinformation and improve online safety ahead of EU elections, it said on 14 February 2024. It says it will set up a ‘local language election centre in-app for each of the 27 individual EU Member States’ and create an elections team at its Dublin office. It is also attempting to tackle misleading AI-generated content, its head of trust and safety for Europe said. The European Commission is working on election misinformation through the Digital Services Act (DSA).

MLex: TikTok's obligation to suspend transferring data to China from Europe following an order from Ireland's privacy watchdog has been suspended by an Irish court today. An Irish judge said the stay would be in place until early October when TikTok will appear for a hearing on its appeal against the Data Protection Commission’s decision that the social media company violated EU data protection rules, imposing a fine of €530m .

MLex: TikTok is making multiple changes to its service in preparation for the EU’s Digital Services Act (EU DSA), including prohibiting targeted ads to 13–17 year-olds, and adding an option to turn off its recommender system. The video-sharing platform is one of 17 ‘very large online platforms’ (VLOPs) under the law, meaning it is subject to stricter requirements and enforcement by the European Commission. It faces a compliance deadline of 28 August 2023.

MLex: Bytedance-owned social network TikTok will appear before EU judges on 29 April 2024 to contest a decision designating it a gatekeeper under the Digital Markets Act (DMA), MLex has learned.

The Information Commissioner's Office (ICO) has announced that TikTok has withdrawn two appeals relating to the processing of children's personal data. TikTok has withdrawn its appeal against the ICO's 2023 penalty notice and agreed to pay the £12.7 million fine imposed for breaches of data protection law, including failing to use children's personal data lawfully. The penalty notice is therefore final. TikTok has also withdrawn its appeal against an ICO information notice requiring it to provide documents and details concerning its processing of the personal data of 13–17-year-olds through its recommender systems. The withdrawal of the appeal against the information notice enables the ICO to continue its investigation, opened in February 2025, into TikTok's use of children's personal data in recommender systems. The withdrawals follow an Upper Tribunal decision in August 2026 dismissing TikTok's argument that its processing of personal data was for artistic purposes and that the ICO was therefore required to obtain prior court approval before issuing the penalty.

MLex: TikTok's EU probe over allegedly addictive features could be resolved through stronger safeguards and mitigation measures rather than a fundamental overhaul of the platform's business model, MLex has learned. The case is shaping up to be a bellwether for how the EU's digital services law applies to recommender systems and engagement-driven design for platforms facing similar charges, such as Meta Platforms.

MLex: A €530m EU fine against TikTok for breaching Regulation (EU) 2016/679, the General Data Protection Regulation (EU GDPR) has raised questions about whether any company that sends personal data to China can do so legally under the law. The Irish data regulator’s decision follows heightened concern about data flows to China. It raises the question of whether companies can fill in the data protection gaps for transfers outside of the EU and still meet the EU GDPR’s ‘essentially equivalent’ standard.

MLex: TikTok has failed in its initial legal effort to quash an appeal to reinstate a £12.7m fine issued by the UK’s privacy watchdog in April 2023 over children’s data misuse, court documents showed on 4 July 2025. The decision by the First-tier Tribunal, which handles cases involving regulators, means that the case can now proceed to a hearing on the substantive issues of allegations into the unlawful processing of children’s data, though no date had been set yet.

Public Law analysis: The appellant Secretary of State appealed against the decision of the High Court refusing to strike out the respondents’ claims for damages for breaches of EU law alleged in the tender process for railway franchises. The respondents are train operating companies and had brought judicial review proceedings and Part 7 proceedings claiming Francovich damages for breaches of EU public procurement rules. Both sets of proceedings made allegations of unlawfulness in the tender process, including breaches of the general principles of EU law. The Part 7 damages claims were brought within the statutory six-year time limit for such claims but the judicial review proceedings were raised outside the three-month time limit running from the material decisions of the Secretary of State which the respondents alleged to be unlawful. The High Court refused to strike out the Part 7 damages claims on the ground that they overlapped with the judicial review claims and the Secretary of State unsuccessfully appealed. Written by Denis Edwards, barrister, at Normanton Chambers.