Apple avoided legal action after being accused of imposing unfair restrictions around the use of its App Store and driving up app prices with the revenue cut it takes from developers – at least for the time being.

Four individuals filed a lawsuit in Oakland, California in December 2011, accusing Apple of monopolistic practices for its refusal to allow owners of iPhone, iPad or iPod Touch devices to download apps from somewhere other than the App Store.

Alternative app portals have been created but Apple customers must “jailbreak” their devices in order to access them.

Apple was accused unlawfully discouraging iPhone customers from downloading apps from the competing stores by telling them that it would void and refuse to honour warranties if they did so.

The plaintiffs also argued that the 30 per cent cut Apple takes from paid apps purchased in the App Store pushes app prices up as developers look to secure sufficient revenue.

US District Judge, Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers, said the complainants had no grounds to file against Apple, as they could not prove they had purchased apps from the App Store and been harmed by Apple’s behaviour as a result.

“At a minimum, Plaintiffs must allege facts showing that each named Plaintiff has personally suffered an injury-in-fact based on Apple’s alleged conduct. This requires that Plaintiffs at least purchased applications,” she wrote in her response.

The judge has allowed the complainants to amend and refile their suit within 21 days, with 4 November set to discuss the matter further.