Opinion of the Advocate General — ECLI:EU:C:2025:463
Date: 2025-06-19
Language of the case: English

summary found under OJ 2019 C 402, p. 19) (‘the decision at issue’). 4 Judgment of 12 May 2022 (C‑377/20, EU:C:2022:379). 5 Judgment of 19 January 2023 (C‑680/20, EU:C:2023:33). 6 Judgment of 21 December 2023 (C‑333/21, EU:C:2023:1011). 7 Judgment of 10 September 2024 (C‑48/22 P, EU:C:2024:726). 8 Judgment of 24 October 2024 (C‑240/22 P, EU:C:2024:915). 9 Paragraph 120 of the judgment under appeal, and recitals 217 and 402 of the decision at issue. 10 Paragraph 121 of the judgment under appeal, and recital 439 of the decision at issue. 11 Paragraphs 274 and 300 of the judgment under appeal, and recitals 752, 753, 1009 and 1010 of the decision at issue. 12 Paragraphs 274, 300 and 314 to 316 of the judgment under appeal. 13 Paragraphs 803 and 805 of the judgment under appeal, and recitals 1015 and 1016 of the decision at issue. 14 Paragraphs 621 and 622 of the judgment under appeal, and recital 1192 of the decision at issue. 15 Paragraph 38 of the judgment under appeal. 16 Order of the President of the Court of 19 January 2023, Google and Alphabet v Commission (C‑738/22 P, EU:C:2023:44). 17 Order of the President of the Court of 18 April 2023, Google and Alphabet v Commission (C‑738/22 P, EU:C:2023:326). 18 See judgment of 10 September 2024, Google and Alphabet v Commission (Google Shopping) (C‑48/22 P, EU:C:2024:726, paragraphs 223 to 230). 19 See, concerning that criterion, judgment of 24 October 2024, Commission v Intel Corporation (C‑240/22 P, EU:C:2024:915, paragraph 90). 20 See paragraphs 623 and 631 of the judgment under appeal. 21 Recital 1195 et seq. of the decision at issue, and paragraph 637 of the judgment under appeal. 22 See recitals 1225 to 1271 of the decision at issue, and paragraphs 700 to 711, 733 and 734 of the judgment under appeal. 23 See paragraphs 679 to 698 and 733 to 802 of the judgment under appeal. 24 See, in particular, recitals 197 and 1292 of the decision at issue, and paragraphs 452, 632, 633 and 1090 of the judgment under appeal. 25 See paragraphs 419 to 538 of the judgment under appeal, in particular paragraphs 426, 428, 434, 443, 446 to 452, 457, 480, 481, 494, 495 and 537. 26 Paragraphs 451, 452, 1018 and 1019 of the judgment under appeal, with reference to recital 822 of, and footnote 908 to, the decision at issue. 27 Judgments of 12 May 2022, Servizio Elettrico Nazionale and Others (C‑377/20, EU:C:2022:379, paragraph 72); of 19 January 2023, Unilever Italia Mkt. Operations (C‑680/20, EU:C:2023:33, paragraphs 40, 44, 52 and 62); of 21 December 2023, European Superleague Company (C‑333/21, EU:C:2023:1011, paragraph 130); of 10 September 2024, Google and Alphabet v Commission (Google Shopping) (C‑48/22 P, EU:C:2024:726, paragraphs 166 and 168); and of 24 October 2024, Commission v Intel Corporation (C‑240/22 P, EU:C:2024:915, paragraphs 179 and 331). 28 Judgments of 12 May 2022, Servizio Elettrico Nazionale and Others (C‑377/20, EU:C:2022:379, paragraph 70), and of 19 January 2023, Unilever Italia Mkt. Operations (C‑680/20, EU:C:2023:33, paragraph 43). 29 Judgment of 6 December 2012 (C‑457/10 P, EU:C:2012:770, paragraph 140). 30 Judgment of 16 June 2022 (C‑698/19 P, EU:C:2022:480, paragraphs 64 and 80). 31 Judgment of 10 September 2024 (C‑48/22 P, EU:C:2024:726, paragraphs 170 to 172 and 240 to 247). 32 Paragraphs 451 and 452 of the judgment under appeal; see also paragraphs 495 and 537 of that judgment. 33 See points 112 to 124 of this Opinion. 34 See paragraphs 336 to 338 and 565 of the judgment under appeal. 35 See judgment of 10 September 2024, Google and Alphabet v Commission (Google Shopping) (C‑48/22 P, EU:C:2024:726, paragraphs 240 to 247), as well as my Opinion in Google and Alphabet v Commission (C‑48/22 P, EU:C:2024:14, points 177 to 182). 36 Paragraph 428 of the judgment under appeal. 37 See, in that context, paragraphs 332 and 333 of the judgment under appeal. 38 See paragraph 330 of the judgment under appeal. 39 Judgment of 9 November 2023, Global Silicones Council and Others v ECHA (C‑559/21 P, EU:C:2023:842, paragraph 50 and the case-law cited). 40 Judgment of 19 December 2013, Siemens and Others v Commission (C‑239/11 P, C‑489/11 P and C‑498/11 P, EU:C:2013:866, paragraphs 38 to 46 and the case-law cited). 41 See, to that effect, ibid. 42 See order of 29 September 2010, EREF v Commission (C‑74/10 P and C‑75/10 P, EU:C:2010:557, paragraph 41 and the case-law cited). 43 See, to that effect, judgment of 10 September 2024, Google and Alphabet v Commission (Google Shopping) (C‑48/22 P, EU:C:2024:726, paragraphs 223 to 229). 44 See, to that effect, judgment of 12 May 2022, Servizio Elettrico Nazionale and Others (C‑377/20, EU:C:2022:379, paragraphs 98 to 102). 45 See, to that effect, judgment of 27 June 2024, Commission v Servier and Others (C‑176/19 P, EU:C:2024:549, paragraph 353). 46 See, on this point, paragraphs 115 and 116 of the judgment under appeal. 47 See, for example, judgment of 24 October 2024, Commission v Intel Corporation (C‑240/22 P, EU:C:2024:915, paragraph 26). 48 See judgments of 14 November 1996, Tetra Pak v Commission (C‑333/94 P, EU:C:1996:436, paragraph 37); of 12 December 1991, Hilti v Commission (T‑30/89, EU:T:1991:70, paragraphs 100 and 101); and of 6 October 1994, Tetra Pak v Commission (T‑83/91, EU:T:1994:246, paragraphs 136 and 137). 49 See, to that effect, judgment of 12 May 2022, Servizio Elettrico Nazionale and Others (C‑377/20, EU:C:2022:379, paragraphs 78 and 91 et seq.). 50 Judgment of 17 September 2007 (T‑201/04, EU:T:2007:289, paragraphs 857, 867 to 869, 977 and 1034 to 1058). 51 Paragraphs 336 and 493 of the judgment under appeal. 52 Judgment of 12 May 2022, Servizio Elettrico Nazionale and Others (C‑377/20, EU:C:2022:379, paragraph 61), and Opinion of Advocate General Rantos in Servizio Elettrico Nazionale and Others (C‑377/20, EU:C:2021:998, points 42 to 46). 53 Opinion of Advocate General Rantos in Servizio Elettrico Nazionale and Others (C‑377/20, EU:C:2021:998, points 47 to 50). 54 Judgments of 12 May 2022, Servizio Elettrico Nazionale and Others (C‑377/20, EU:C:2022:379, paragraph 78), and of 19 January 2023, Unilever Italia Mkt. Operations (C‑680/20, EU:C:2023:33, paragraphs 39 and 57). See also judgments of 12 January 2023, Lietuvos geležinkeliai v Commission (C‑42/21 P, EU:C:2023:12, paragraph 91), and of 21 December 2023, European Superleague Company (C‑333/21, EU:C:2023:1011, paragraphs 134 to 138, 147, 148 and 152). See, further, judgment (subsequently set aside by the Court of Justice) of 12 June 2014, Intel v Commission (T‑286/09, EU:T:2014:547, paragraphs 198 to 210); the question now arises again in pending case T‑1129/23. 55 The analysis relates to hypothetical as-efficient competitors and not to the actual competitors of the dominant undertaking; see judgments of 12 May 2022, Servizio Elettrico Nazionale and Others (C‑377/20, EU:C:2022:379, paragraphs 78, 79, 82, 91 and 101); of 19 January 2023, Unilever Italia Mkt. Operations (C‑680/20, EU:C:2023:33, paragraphs 56 and 59); and of 24 October 2024, Commission v Intel Corporation (C‑240/22 P, EU:C:2024:915, paragraphs 311 and 343). 56 See, to that effect, judgments of 12 May 2022, Servizio Elettrico Nazionale and Others (C‑377/20, EU:C:2022:379, paragraph 82), and of 24 October 2024, Commission v Intel Corporation (C‑240/22 P, EU:C:2024:915, paragraph 181). 57 See judgments of 17 February 2011, TeliaSonera Sverige (C‑52/09, EU:C:2011:83, paragraphs 40 to 43); of 27 March 2012, Post Danmark (C‑209/10, EU:C:2012:172, paragraph 38); of 6 October 2015, Post Danmark (C‑23/14, EU:C:2015:651, paragraph 57 et seq.); of 19 January 2023, Unilever Italia Mkt. Operations (C‑680/20, EU:C:2023:33, paragraphs 56 and 57); and of 24 October 2024, Commission v Intel Corporation (C‑240/22 P, EU:C:2024:915, paragraph 181). See also Opinion of Advocate General Rantos in Servizio Elettrico Nazionale and Others (C‑377/20, EU:C:2021:998, point 70). 58 See judgments of 12 May 2022, Servizio Elettrico Nazionale and Others (C‑377/20, EU:C:2022:379, paragraphs 79 to 83), and of 19 January 2023, Unilever Italia Mkt. Operations (C‑680/20, EU:C:2023:33, paragraph 59); see also Opinion of Advocate General Rantos in Servizio Elettrico Nazionale and Others (C‑377/20, EU:C:2021:998, points 68 to 71). See, however, my Opinion in Google and Alphabet v Commission (C‑48/22 P, EU:C:2024:14, point 192 et seq.). 59 Judgments of 6 September 2017, Intel v Commission (C‑413/14 P, EU:C:2017:632, paragraphs 138 and 139), and of 19 January 2023, Unilever Italia Mkt. Operations (C‑680/20, EU:C:2023:33, paragraphs 52 to 62). 60 See, to that effect, judgments of 6 September 2017, Intel v Commission (C‑413/14 P, EU:C:2017:632, paragraphs 141 to 144), and of 10 September 2024, Google and Alphabet v Commission (Google Shopping) (C‑48/22 P, EU:C:2024:726, paragraph 265). 61 See judgments of 6 October 2015, Post Danmark (C‑23/14, EU:C:2015:651, paragraphs 57 and 58); of 12 May 2022, Servizio Elettrico Nazionale and Others (C‑377/20, EU:C:2022:379, paragraph 81); of 19 January 2023, Unilever Italia Mkt. Operations (C‑680/20, EU:C:2023:33, paragraphs 57 and 58); and of 10 September 2024, Google and Alphabet v Commission (Google Shopping) (C‑48/22 P, EU:C:2024:726, paragraph 264). 62 See judgments of 6 October 2015, Post Danmark (C‑23/14, EU:C:2015:651, paragraphs 57 to 61); of 12 May 2022, Servizio Elettrico Nazionale and Others (C‑377/20, EU:C:2022:379, paragraph 82) (‘when [that test] can be carried out’); of 19 January 2023, Unilever Italia Mkt. Operations (C‑680/20, EU:C:2023:33, paragraph 57); and of 10 September 2024, Google and Alphabet v Commission (Google Shopping) (C‑48/22 P, EU:C:2024:726, paragraphs 266 to 269). See also my Opinions in Post Danmark (C‑23/14, EU:C:2015:343, points 71 to 74) and in Google and Alphabet v Commission (C‑48/22 P, EU:C:2024:14, point 192 et seq.). 63 See paragraphs 115 and 116 of the judgment under appeal. 64 See, for example, paragraph 294 of the judgment under appeal. 65 See point 18 of this Opinion. 66 Judgments of 21 December 2023, European Superleague Company (C‑333/21, EU:C:2023:1011, paragraphs 129 and 131), and of 10 September 2024, Google and Alphabet v Commission (Google Shopping) (C‑48/22 P, EU:C:2024:726, paragraph 167). 67 See, in that regard, my Opinion in Google and Alphabet v Commission (C‑48/22 P, EU:C:2024:14, points 191 to 198). See also point 73 of the Commission’s 2024 draft Guidelines on the application of Article 102 [TFEU] to abusive exclusionary conduct by dominant undertakings, as well as the accompanying Staff Policy Brief of March 2023 with the title ‘A dynamic and workable effects-based approach to abuse of dominance’, p. 5 et seq., both available under Application of Article 102 TFEU – European Commission. 68 See, to that effect, judgment of 12 May 2022, Servizio Elettrico Nazionale and Others (C‑377/20, EU:C:2022:379, paragraph 99); see also judgment of 17 September 2007, Microsoft v Commission (T‑201/04, EU:T:2007:289, paragraph 1069). 69 Judgment of 12 May 2022, Servizio Elettrico Nazionale and Others (C‑377/20, EU:C:2022:379, paragraph 102). 70 Ibid., paragraphs 78, 91 and 101. 71 See, to that effect, the case-law set out in point 106 of this Opinion. See, to that effect also, especially as regards digital markets, judgment of 10 September 2024, Google and Alphabet v Commission (Google Shopping) (C‑48/22 P, EU:C:2024:726, paragraph 265), in which the Court only partially refers to the judgment of 6 September 2017, Intel v Commission (C‑413/14 P, EU:C:2017:632, paragraphs 138 and 139), without specifically mentioning the criterion of market coverage that was dispensable in that case because of Google’s dominant market position. 72 As set out in point 13 of this Opinion, a fork is new software established from the source code of existing software. 73 Paragraph 808 of the judgment under appeal. 74 An API is a particular set of rules and specifications that a software program follows in order to access and make use of the services and resources provided by another software program or hardware that also implements that API. In essence, APIs allow software programs and hardware, or different software programs, to communicate with each other (recitals 89 and 90 of the decision at issue). According to Google, APIs enable Android app developers notably to take advantage of Google’s proprietary services, like Google Maps. 75 Judgment of 17 September 2007 (T‑201/04, EU:T:2007:289). 76 See, in that regard, point 107 of this Opinion. 77 See, in that regard, judgment of 6 October 2021, World Duty Free Group and Spain v Commission (C‑51/19 P and C‑64/19 P, EU:C:2021:793, paragraphs 70 to 73). 78 Judgments of 14 February 1978, United Brands and United Brands Continentaal v Commission (27/76, EU:C:1978:22, paragraph 184); of 27 March 2012, Post Danmark (C‑209/10, EU:C:2012:172, paragraphs 40 to 42); and of 30 January 2020, Generics (UK) and Others (C‑307/18, EU:C:2020:52, paragraphs 165 to 167). 79 See, in that regard, points 79 and 80 of this Opinion and the case-law cited. 80 See points 97 and 186 of this Opinion. 81 Judgment of 10 April 2014, Commission v Siemens Österreich and Others and Siemens Transmission & Distribution and Others v Commission (C‑231/11 P to C‑233/11 P, EU:C:2014:256, paragraph 102). 82 Judgments of 8 July 1999, Commission v Anic Partecipazioni (C‑49/92 P, EU:C:1999:356, paragraph 81); of 7 January 2004, Aalborg Portland and Others v Commission (C‑204/00 P, C‑205/00 P, C‑211/00 P, C‑213/00 P, C‑217/00 P and C‑219/00 P, EU:C:2004:6, paragraph 258); and of 6 December 2012, Commission v Verhuizingen Coppens (C‑441/11 P, EU:C:2012:778, paragraph 41). 83 See judgments of 18 April 2024, Heureka Group (Online price comparison services) (C‑605/21, EU:C:2024:324, paragraphs 62 and 79), and of 1 July 2010, AstraZeneca v Commission (T‑321/05, EU:T:2010:266, paragraphs 891 to 895); see also my Opinion in Heureka Group (Online price comparison services) (C‑605/21, EU:C:2023:695, points 90 and 91). 84 Judgment of 6 December 2012, Commission v Verhuizingen Coppens (C‑441/11 P, EU:C:2012:778, paragraphs 35 to 39). 85 See, to that effect, ibid., paragraphs 51 and 52. 86 See, to that effect, judgment of 16 June 2022, Sony Optiarc and Sony Optiarc America v Commission (C‑698/19 P, EU:C:2022:480, paragraphs 64 and 80). 87 Council Regulation of 16 December 2002 on the implementation of the rules on competition laid down in Articles 81 and 82 of the Treaty (OJ 2003 L 1, p. 1). 88 Judgments of 15 October 2002, Limburgse Vinyl Maatschappij and Others v Commission (C‑238/99 P, C‑244/99 P, C‑245/99 P, C‑247/99 P, C‑250/99 P to C‑252/99 P and C‑254/99 P, EU:C:2002:582, paragraph 692); of 8 December 2011, Chalkor v Commission (C‑386/10 P, EU:C:2011:815, paragraph 63); and of 26 September 2018, Infineon Technologies v Commission (C‑99/17 P, EU:C:2018:773, paragraph 193). 89 Judgments of 8 December 2011, Chalkor v Commission (C‑386/10 P, EU:C:2011:815, paragraph 64); of 10 July 2014, Telefónica and Telefónica de España v Commission (C‑295/12 P, EU:C:2014:2062, paragraph 213); and of 26 September 2018, Infineon Technologies v Commission (C‑99/17 P, EU:C:2018:773, paragraph 194). 90 Judgments of 10 July 2014, Telefónica and Telefónica de España v Commission (C‑295/12 P, EU:C:2014:2062, paragraph 200); of 26 January 2017, Villeroy & Boch Austria v Commission (C‑626/13 P, EU:C:2017:54, paragraph 82); and of 26 September 2018, Infineon Technologies v Commission (C‑99/17 P, EU:C:2018:773, paragraph 195). 91 Judgments of 17 December 1998, Baustahlgewebe v Commission (C‑185/95 P, EU:C:1998:608, paragraph 128); of 28 June 2005, Dansk Rørindustri and Others v Commission (C‑189/02 P, C‑202/02 P, C‑205/02 P to C‑208/02 P and C‑213/02 P, EU:C:2005:408, paragraph 244); and of 26 September 2018, Infineon Technologies v Commission (C‑99/17 P, EU:C:2018:773, paragraph 192). 92 See, to that effect, judgment of 24 September 2009, Erste Group Bank and Others v Commission (C‑125/07 P, C‑133/07 P, C‑135/07 P and C‑137/07 P, EU:C:2009:576, paragraphs 158, 159 and 180 to 183). 93 Judgment of 8 February 2007, Groupe Danone v Commission (C‑3/06 P, EU:C:2007:88, paragraph 61). 94 See my Opinion in Joined Cases Fresh Del Monte Produce v Commission and Commission v Fresh Del Monte Produce (C‑293/13 P and C‑294/13 P, EU:C:2014:2439, paragraph 273). 95 Judgment of 10 July 2019, Commission v Icap and Others (C‑39/18 P, EU:C:2019:584, paragraphs 31 and 38 and the case-law cited). 96 See judgment of 25 March 2021, Lundbeck v Commission (C‑591/16 P, EU:C:2021:243, paragraphs 197 and 198 and the case-law cited).