# C_2018009EN.01000401.xml

| 12.1.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 9/4 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.1.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 9/4

---

Opinion of the Advisory Committee on restrictive practices and dominant positions given at its meeting of 20 June 2017 regarding a draft decision relating to Case AT.39740 — Google Search (Shopping)

Rapporteur: Cyprus

(2018/C 9/05)

| (1) | The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that, for the purposes of this case, the relevant product markets are the market for general search services and the market for comparison shopping services. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that, for the purposes of this case, the relevant product markets are the market for general search services and the market for comparison shopping services.

| (2) | The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that, for the purposes of this case, the relevant geographic markets for general search services and comparison shopping services are all national in scope. |
| --- | --- |

(2)

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that, for the purposes of this case, the relevant geographic markets for general search services and comparison shopping services are all national in scope.

| (3) | The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that Google has held a dominant position in each national market for general search in the EEA since 2008, apart from in the Czech Republic, where Google has held a dominant position since 2011. |
| --- | --- |

(3)

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that Google has held a dominant position in each national market for general search in the EEA since 2008, apart from in the Czech Republic, where Google has held a dominant position since 2011.

| (4) | The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that the more favourable positioning and display in Google’s general search results pages, of its own comparison shopping service compared to competing comparison shopping services, constitutes an abuse of a dominant position within the meaning of Article 102 of the TFEU and Article 54 of the EEA Agreement. |
| --- | --- |

(4)

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that the more favourable positioning and display in Google’s general search results pages, of its own comparison shopping service compared to competing comparison shopping services, constitutes an abuse of a dominant position within the meaning of Article 102 of the TFEU and Article 54 of the EEA Agreement.

| (5) | The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that the infringement started in each of the 13 national markets for general search services from the moment Google launched the Product Universal in that national market, or, if the Product Universal was never launched in that national market, from the moment it launched the Shopping Unit in that market. |
| --- | --- |

(5)

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that the infringement started in each of the 13 national markets for general search services from the moment Google launched the Product Universal in that national market, or, if the Product Universal was never launched in that national market, from the moment it launched the Shopping Unit in that market.

| (6) | The Advisory Committee does not have any observations or other points that it would ask the Commission to take into account. |
| --- | --- |

(6)

The Advisory Committee does not have any observations or other points that it would ask the Commission to take into account.

| (7) | The Advisory Committee recommends the publication of its opinion in the Official Journal of the European Union. |
| --- | --- |

(7)

The Advisory Committee recommends the publication of its opinion in the Official Journal of the European Union.

Official Journal of the European Union

---