A Berlin district court ruled that Google must pay Idealo about €465 million in damages for cartel-like behavior, finding that Google abused its dominant search position to favor its own price-comparison service and disadvantage competing offers.

The ruling builds on EU antitrust actions dating back to 2017 and follows a 2024 European Court of Justice decision that confirmed self-preferencing by Google’s Shopping unit; neither ruling is final pending appeals.

This decision arrives amid broader EU scrutiny of Google, as regulators continue to pursue antitrust actions across ad tech and search practices.

Both verdicts are not legally binding yet, with defendants able to appeal the decisions.

Related sponsor content accompanies the coverage but does not affect the legal outcomes.

The court accepted Idealo’s liability arguments but reduced the damages; the judgment explicitly allows an appeal to proceed to the Kammergericht, the higher regional court.

In a separate but related case, Producto GmbH (Testberichte.de) received about €107 million in damages, with both rulings still subject to appeal.

A second, smaller related ruling for Producto GmbH awarded €103.7 million for damages, also not final and subject to appeal.

Google has announced measures to increase transparency in bidding, open access to competition, and connect ad servers to alternatives, with EU evaluators assessing whether these commitments are sufficient.

Google plans to appeal the decision.

Google disputes that the majority of excessive claims were upheld and says changes since 2017 improved competition without EC intervention, and that Shopping is treated as a separate business with its own ad auctions.

The ruling could have implications for Google’s practices and German price-comparison sites moving forward.

Google intends to appeal both rulings, arguing that 2017 changes improved competition and that Shopping usage has expanded across Europe.

The ruling signals ongoing litigation over Google’s handling of price-comparison services and self-preferencing in search and shopping contexts.

These cases reflect broader EU antitrust scrutiny of Google and could influence future damages claims and settlements.

Idealo’s leadership vows continued legal action, arguing that market abuse must have consequences beyond penalties and that the case should push for accountability.

The ruling specifically concerns damages for antitrust/market-abuse in the German market.

The broader regulatory context includes EU investigations and fines targeting Google for ad tech and search-related abuses, reinforcing ongoing scrutiny.

In parallel, the EU Commission fined Google nearly €3 billion for advertising-related conduct, with Google planning reforms and a court challenge to the decision.

Together, the Idealo and related cases illustrate ongoing regulatory battles over Google’s alleged self-preferencing and its impact on competitors in Germany.

Idealo’s €465 million award is well below its initial demand; the court reviewed damages from 2008 to 2023, with possible additional damages for 2024-25 under consideration.

Idealo, majority-owned by Axel Springer, had sought at least €3.3 billion in damages, with the court largely upholding claims of anti-competitive conduct.

Idealo sees the ruling as validation that Google continued abusing market power beyond the 2017 EC decision and the subsequent €2.4 billion EU fine, with implications for ongoing enforcement.