Google Hit With Antitrust Fine Over Shopping Comparison Practices

Google’s lost an appeal against a €2.4 billion EU antitrust fine—a double whammy after a €13 billion demand for back taxes.

The fine—at the time, the largest ever imposed by the European Commission—was originally levied in 2017, with the company having fought it ever since. However, Google’s appeal was first rejected by the EU’s General Court and then by the EU Court of Justice, which has now upheld the ruling.

The fine was triggered in response to a case brought by price comparison sites including Foundem and Kelkoo, which alleged that the company was giving preference to its own shopping recommendations, ahead of those of rivals.

“This decision is a win for fair competition and consumer choice,” said Kelkoo in response to the news.

Meanwhile, Thomas Vinje, senior counsel at law firm Clifford Chance, which defended Foundem in the EU General Court appeal, said: “The judgment is a victory across the board for the European Commission and the comparison shopping complainants, including Foundem, which fought for over fourteen years to get to this point.”

Google had been presenting search results from its own comparison shopping service in a primary position and promoted them in boxes, accompanied by “attractive” image and text information.

By contrast, the search results of competing comparison shopping services appeared as simple generic results, displayed in the form of blue links, and were prone to being demoted by adjustment algorithms in Google’s general results pages.

“Google’s recent €2.4 billion fine from the EU is a bold reminder that tech giants must prioritise user empowerment and transparency in data usage,” comments Tim Drake, CRO at security support firm Paragon CC.

“This ruling highlights the urgent need for Google to enhance its consent mechanisms, giving users greater control over their data while aligning with strict regulatory frameworks.”

In its ruling, the Court of Justice points out that, as a general rule, a dominant undertaking which treats its own products or services more favorably than it treats those of its competitors isn’t necessarily breaking competition rules.

“However, it finds, in the present case, that the General Court correctly established that, in the light of the characteristics of the market and the specific circumstances of the case, Google’s conduct was discriminatory and did not fall within the scope of competition on the merits,” it explained.

The decision has implications for other companies, says Drake, sending a strong message that tech firms must compete on a level playing field, and give users greater control over their data while aligning with strict regulatory frameworks.

“As the company faces increasing scrutiny over its market practices, it’s crucial for all Google product users to take immediate action and review their consent settings,” he says.

“With the Digital Marketing Act the stakes are high, and these changes are not just about compliance; they’re about restoring trust with users.”

The fine follows hard on the heels of an even larger European bill for Google, which this week was ordered to pay €13 billion in back taxes to the Irish government.

Google has been approached for comment.