Apple will challenge a UK government demand to access encrypted customer data at a Royal Courts of Justice hearing in London on Friday.

The appeal will be considered by the investigatory powers tribunal, which investigates claims that the domestic intelligence services have acted unlawfully.

What is the UK government asking Apple to do?

The Home Office has issued a “technical capability notice” under the Investigatory Powers Act, which requires companies to assist law enforcement in providing evidence. The notice focuses on Apple’s Advanced Data Protection service, which encrypts personal data uploaded and stored remotely in Apple’s cloud servers.

The government wants Apple to provide the UK with the ability to access the content via a backdoor into the service.

Why is Apple objecting?

Apple emphasises privacy as one of its “core values”. In a submission to parliament last year it said the IPA gave the government the “authority to issue secret orders requiring providers to break encryption by inserting backdoors into their software products”.

Apple removed the ADP tool, its strongest data protection product, from the UK last month. ADP deploys end-to-end encryption, which means only the account holder can decrypt the files. The iMessage and FaceTime services remain end-to-end encrypted.

Apple said: “As we have said many times before, we have never built a backdoor or master key to any of our products or services and we never will.”

Two human rights groups, Liberty and Privacy International, have also said they will challenge the TCN. They pointed to reports that the TCN is a blanket request applying to any Apple user worldwide. This would create “a back door to billions of people’s personal data, including personal messages and documents, that could be accessed by hackers and oppressive governments,” the groups say.

Could Apple win the challenge?

Apple is helped by the fact that the government’s power to request the data must be compatible with protecting human rights, according to Dr Daniella Lock, a law lecturer at King’s College London. Requesting a general backdoor to access encrypted data could be deemed disproportionate, she says, adding there could also be questions raised about safeguarding of the data by security agencies.

Lock adds that Apple’s chances are hindered by the fact that hearings are held in secret, where the UK government is able to put its case behind closed doors – hindering the ability of Apple’s lawyers to challenge the government’s case. Courts tend to uphold levels of secrecy when national security is at stake, says Lock.

“Apple’s case is hindered by the secrecy surrounding the hearings,” she adds. “The majority of the case looks set to take place behind closed doors. To the extent that the hearings are held in secret, Apple’s lawyers will be severely limited in being able to challenge the UK government’s evidence.”

The record for appeals when national security is concerned does not bode well for Apple.

“The investigatory powers tribunal has also had a tendency to find in favour of the UK government, where it claims surveillance powers are necessary in the interests of national security,” says Lock.

A submission to the tribunal by the Guardian and other media organisations has said the hearing should be held in open court since the case is a matter of public interest and the appeal has already been leaked.

Does the US government support Apple?

The US has made clear its unease with the UK government request. President Donald Trump said he confronted Keir Starmer over the move and compared it with Chinese government surveillance.

“We told them you can’t do this,” Trump said in an interview with the Spectator magazine. “We actually told [Starmer] … that’s incredible. That’s something, you know, that you hear about with China.”

On Thursday a group of Democrat and Republican lawmakers called on the tribunal to “remove the cloak of secrecy” around the government order and to make Friday’s hearing, as well as any further proceedings, public. Bloomberg also reported that British officials have held talks with their US counterparts in a bid to resolve concerns about the TCN, which has included informing the US side that the UK is not asking for “blanket” access to user data. 

Would an Apple defeat set a precedent?

Regardless of the outcome, more clashes with tech firms are possible. The IPA requires companies such as Apple to notify the UK government of any product changes that could alter the government’s ability to access users’ data. Therefore, more notices could be issued to services such as WhatsApp, which has also vowed to fight privacy challenges.

“The Investigatory Powers regime requires telecommunications operators to notify the UK government of service and product changes. This raises the profile of significant service changes and could encourage orders to be issued,” says Ross McKenzie, a partner at the UK law firm Addleshaw Goddard.

He adds: “Apple will need to persuade the court that the request is not proportionate, taking into account their users’ rights to privacy, and likely impact on overall security.  This is a significant test for the battle between law enforcement and technology.”

• This article was amended on 14 March 2025. The Apple case is being heard at the Royal Courts of Justice, not the high court as an earlier version said.