Luxembourg, January 12, 2026 — Google and Alphabet have asked the EU General Court (GC) to annul the European Commission’s September 2025 adtech abuse decision, arguing that the authority relied on flawed market definitions, an incorrect legal framework, and erroneous findings of self-preferencing across Google’s advertising technology stack.
In an action filed on November 20, 2025, the companies contest both infringement findings in Case AT.40760 and the conclusion that the conduct formed a single and continuous abuse of dominance under Article 102 TFEU. In the decision, the EC fined Google €2.95 billion (approximately 3.43 billion) for abusing its dominance in the online advertising technology market, accusing the US tech giant of distorting competition to the detriment of rivals, publishers and advertisers.
Market Definition and Dominance
As a first line of challenge, Google argues that the Commission misdefined the relevant markets and wrongly concluded that the company held dominant positions. According to the applicants, these errors undermine the entire competitive assessment underpinning the decision.
Buy-Side Conduct
A central part of the appeal attacks the legal test applied to Google’s demand-side tools. Google claims the Commission adopted an unlawful framework for assessing competition on the merits when evaluating Google Ads and DV360.
The companies dispute findings that Google Ads channelled demand preferentially to AdX or inflated impression values through deliberate self-second pricing. They also challenge conclusions that DV360 placed strategically lower bids on rival supply-side platforms to hinder the adoption of header bidding and divert spend to AdX.
Sell-Side Conduct
Google similarly contests the Commission’s assessment of its publisher ad server practices, arguing that the authority again relied on an incorrect legal standard.
The appeal challenges findings that Google’s ad server systematically favoured AdX bids across multiple auction channels, including waterfall auctions, header bidding — both before and after 2019 — and open bidding. Google argues that the Commission failed to show that these design choices departed from competition on the merits or harmed rivals in a legally sufficient manner.
Effects and Scope
The applicants also dispute the Commission’s conclusions on anticompetitive effects, arguing that the decision fails to demonstrate harm in EEA-wide markets for supply-side platforms or publisher ad servers. They further contest the finding that buy-side conduct could affect publisher ad server markets.
Google additionally argues that the Commission wrongly bundled distinct practices into a single and continuous infringement and incorrectly extended the infringement period in certain jurisdictions, including France after September 2020.
Finally, the appeal challenges both the necessity and proportionality of the remedies imposed, arguing that additional obligations beyond a broad cease-and-desist order were unjustified. Google and Alphabet also seek annulment or reduction of the fine, claiming errors in its calculation.
The case is T-794/25, Google and Alphabet v Commission before the General Court.
Source: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=OJ:C_202600185
