Hard setback for outgoing Competition Commissioner, Danish liberal, in European justice Margrethe Vestager. He General Court of the EU (TGUE) on Wednesday cancelled the fine of almost 1.5 billion euros that Brussels had imposed on Google for his monopolistic abuses in the advertising market onlineThe judgment states that the Community executive did not take sufficient account of all the relevant circumstances of the case.
Cancellation of the fine may still be subject to appeal at second instance before the Court of Justice in Luxembourg. The CJEU ruled in favour of the Community Executive last week by definitively ratifying the first of the fines imposed on Google, worth 2.4 billion euros for abuses with its price comparison service.
The American giant is still appealing a third fine of 4.340 million euros before the European courts and is referring to monopolistic abuses with its operating system. Android, which operates around 80% of mobile phones and tablets in the EU.
[Google pierde su último recurso contra la multa de 2.400 millones de Bruselas por abusos monopolísticos]
The 1.5 billion fine cancelled this Wednesday by the TGUE refers to monopolistic abuses in advertising online. Brussels concluded that Google was taking advantage of its dominant position in this sector –in which he has a market share of over 70% via the platform AdSense for Search– to try to drive its competitors out of the market.
Specifically, the Commission accused The IT giant is blocking the display of websites of newspapers, telecommunications operators and e-commerce stores contextual advertising -i.e. search-related ads- from Google’s competitors, by imposing three unfair contractual clauses (exclusivity, placement and prior authorization). Internships lasting more than 10 years: between 2006 and 2016.
In its ruling of this Wednesday, the TGUE confirms most of the conclusions of the Commission, but concludes that this institution made errors in its assessment of the duration of the clauses in question, as well as of the market covered by them in 2016.The Commission has not demonstrated that the three clauses it had identified each constituted an abuse of a dominant position,” the judgment states. For all these reasons, it annuls in its entirety the fine imposed on the IT giant.
In particular, the decision states that Brussels has not demonstrated that the clauses in question could deter publishers to use intermediaries that compete with Google. Nor has it been proven that they could prevent these competitors from accessing a significant share of the online advertising intermediation market in the context of search.
According to the Court, the Commission failed to take into account all the relevant circumstances of the case when assessing the length of time for which the publishers had been subject to these clauses. Many of the agreements to which the publishers had been subject They only lasted a few yearseven if they were subsequently renewed, sometimes several times.
The judgment criticizes Brussels for not having checked whether the publishers had the possibility of turning to Google’s competitors when negotiating the extensions, or even of terminating the contract.The Commission has not demonstrated that these clauses could have produced an exclusionary effect.because of its coverage in 2016, in the absence of data specifically related to that year,” he said.
“In these circumstances, the Court considers that the Commission has also failed to demonstrate that the clauses in question could, on the one hand, have deterred innovation; on the other hand, have helped Google to maintain and strengthen its dominant position on the national online advertising markets in question; and finally, have harmed consumers,” the judgment concludes.
