A Costly Start to Summer for Google
The summer of 2026 is off to a costly start for Google. The European Court of Justice (ECJ) has upheld a 4.1 billion euro fine imposed on Google by the European Commission, and a court in Sweden has ordered Google to pay 1.7 billion euros in damages.
The ECJ Ruling – A Fine of 4.1 Billion Euros
On July 2, 2026, the European Court of Justice (ECJ) upheld a fine of 4.1 billion euros that the European Commission had imposed on Google (ECJ Ruling of July 2, 2026, Case No. C-738/22 P).
The European Commission had found that manufacturers of Android smartphones and mobile network operators who wished to integrate Google services into Android devices were always required to install an entire package of Google apps. This included the Chrome browser and Google Search. These obligations were part of Google’s pre-installation agreements and license terms. As a result, Chrome and Google Search were preinstalled on nearly all Android devices. In the Commission’s view, Google thereby abused its dominant market position.
The Case in Sweden – Damages of 1.7 Billion Euros
In 2017, the European Commission dicovered that Google had favored its own shopping services (now Google Shopping) over price comparison services offered by other providers. The European Commission viewed this self-preferencing as an abuse of Google’s market power. In 2024, the European Court of Justice upheld this decision (ECJ Judgment of September 10, 2024, Case No. C‑48/22 P).
Based on these findings, a Swedish price comparison portal filed a lawsuit against Google seeking damages. The company argued that it had suffered significant harm because its ads had been demoted in Google’s search results. The Swedish court has now confirmed this. However, the amount of damages awarded fell significantly short of the comparison portal’s claim. The company had originally sought 7.2 billion euros.
Google has announced its intention to appeal the ruling. In 2017, Google had made extensive changes to its search results, which Google maintained were effective.
In Germany, too, Google was ordered to pay damages for favoring its own services.
In November 2025, the Berlin Regional Court II ordered Google to pay 456 million euros in damages to the price comparison service Idealo because Google had favored its own services over Idealo’s (Berlin Regional Court II ruling of November 14, 2025, Case No.: 16 O 195/19 Kart (2)). This ruling is also based on the European Commission’s 2017 findings, which were upheld by the European Court of Justice in 2024.
Idealo had originally sought significantly higher damages from Google. As a result, Idealo announced that it would appeal the ruling. Google also announced that it would not accept the ruling.
In a similar case, Google must pay the comparison site Testberichte.de damages in the amount of 107 million euros (Berlin Regional Court II judgment of November 13, 2025, Case No.: 16 O 275/24).
A damages lawsuit filed by the hotel comparison platform Trivago against Google is pending before the Hamburg Regional Court. Trivago accuses Google of giving preferential treatment to its own hotel search service in search results and thereby deliberately disadvantaging competitors. A decision in this case is still pending.
Enforcing the Law Against Big Tech – A Battle Against Windmills?
Google finds itself repeatedly facing investigations, fines, and claims for damages. Some of the fines imposed and damages awarded are substantial. Nevertheless, the impression remains that these are merely a drop in the bucket. The attempt to curb the market power of tech giants seems like a battle against windmills. Nevertheless, Germany and Europe should continue to consistently apply and enforce the existing legal tools, in particular antitrust law, the Digital Markets Act, and the Digital Services Act. Only in this way can the hope for less market power, more diversity, and fair competition remain alive.
Charlotte Werther, LL.M., is a lawyer and research associate at the Open Search Foundation e.V. As part of the PriDI project, she focuses on designing an open search infrastructure that complies with fundamental rights.
