
Both parties agree to drop allegations and re-run the procurement process for the Metropolitan Police's data service.
AI-generated summary
Palantir sued MOPAC after a £50 million contract for police data services was blocked. MOPAC had alleged procurement irregularities, while Palantir claimed the block was based on company ethics.
LONDON — The Mayor of London Sadiq Khan and U.S. tech company Palantir have agreed to drop legal proceedings relating to a blocked £50 million police contract.
Palantir brought a claim against the Mayor’s Office for Policing and Crime (MOPAC) in the High Court in June after Khan’s deputy mayor refused to sign off on the £50 million contract with the Metropolitan Police for the provision of an AI and data analysis service.
In July, lawyers working on behalf of MOPAC in turn accused the Met Police and Palantir of coordinating to fix the outcome of the procurement process in breach of the rules. Palantir claimed Khan’s office had unlawfully blocked the contract over the company's “values and ethics,” based on media reporting.
A full trial was expected in January but on Wednesday both sides agreed to “settle their differences” and drop the allegations without admitting liability. They will each cover their own legal costs.
In an agreed statement, the two sides said MOPAC’s decision to block the Palantir contract was “not based on Palantir’s values or ethics or any wider reporting about the company,” though MOPAC said it “recognizes Palantir’s concerns that media reporting of a statement from the Mayor's spokesperson before the decision was taken could have incorrectly created the impression that an assessment of the company’s values had been a factor in that decision.”
“MOPAC’s consideration was based upon its statutory role of examining spend proposals, against the appropriate legal tests and the relevant guidance on procurement, governance, affordability and ensuring value for money for Londoners and in doing so it focussed on the available information at the time,” the statement said.
The settlement also notes that MOPAC is working with Metropolitan Police Service to re-run a competitive procurement for the relevant service, which Palantir will be eligible to bid for.
“MOPAC does not have, and has never had, any policy of not contracting with Palantir,” the statement confirms, while noting the mayor’s duty is to ensure “all procurements are lawful, fair, transparent and deliver value for money.”
“London is the technology capital of Europe, and I am proud that leading software firms choose the city as their home. Palantir makes a significant contribution to jobs and investment in the capital, employing a large number of Londoners whose services have been procured legally by organizations across the U.K. and beyond,” Khan said.
AI outlook — possibilities, not facts
MOPAC and the Metropolitan Police will launch a new competitive procurement process.
Very likely · Within months

Russia's Supreme Court is preparing legislation to reduce jury panels and allow judges into deliberation rooms, sparking criticism over the independence of jury trials, which traditionally yield higher acquittal rates.

An antitrust lawsuit filed in California alleges that Anthropic, OpenAI, xAI, and Google DeepMind conspired to artificially slow AI development, claiming this coordination constitutes price-fixing and harms paying subscribers.

A Hong Kong court sentenced three Tiananmen vigil activists, Lee Cheuk-yan, Chow Hang-tung, and Albert Ho, to prison for five to seven years for national security crimes after being convicted of breaching the Chinese constitution.

A Hong Kong court sentenced three Tiananmen vigil activists to between five and seven years in prison on Friday under Beijing's national security law, triggering international condemnation.

The EU's General Court rejected Roman Abramovich's challenge to sanctions, upholding asset freezes and travel restrictions imposed after Russia's invasion of Ukraine.

The EU Court of Justice ruled that Vlaams Belang's anti-immigration campaign spoofing Ikea's branding may harm the furniture maker's reputation, favoring trademark rights over political parody.