EU General Court dismisses Apple's three DMA challenges

The General Court, sitting in its Eighth Chamber with five judges, dismissed cases T-1079/23, T-1080/23 and T-214/24. "The General Court dismisses all the actions brought by Apple," the tribunal said, according to Tech Times. It added that it confirmed "the designation of Apple as a gatekeeper in relation to the App Store and iOS." The September 2023 designation also covered Safari.

Apple's main argument turned on counting. It said its App Stores for iPhone, iPad, Mac, Apple Watch and Apple TV were five separate services, not one. The judges disagreed. They held that every store does the same job: connecting app developers with end users to distribute software. "The commission was therefore correct in considering that each of the App Stores was used for the same purpose and that they could therefore be regarded as a single CPS," they wrote, Courthouse News reported.

The third action, T-214/24, was Apple's bid to erase the Commission's classification of iMessage as a number-independent interpersonal communications service. The court ruled it inadmissible. Brussels had investigated whether to designate iMessage but declined, so the classification produced no binding legal effects on Apple. "None of the obligations laid down by the DMA applies to iMessage since that service has not been listed in a designation decision as an important gateway," the court said, according to Tech Times.

A procedural barrier

The court did not reach Apple's substantive objections to the interoperability rules. It found the company was contesting obligations that flow from its designation, not the designation itself. The DMA's interoperability provision, the judges said, defines duties that apply only after a designation has occurred. A gatekeeper must wait until the Commission applies those rules in a later enforcement decision. Assimakis Komninos, a competition partner at White & Case in Brussels, told Courthouse News the message was: "It's premature."

Pierre Larouche, chair of law and innovation at Université de Montréal, said the refusal to hear Apple's arguments means they will return in another case. "The refusal to entertain Apple's arguments against the DMA's interoperability obligations means that these arguments will come back in another case," he told Courthouse News.

What it means

Tech Times reported that the sequencing rule would bind other designated gatekeepers, not just Apple, and called the judgment the most significant legal test the DMA has faced since it took effect in May 2023. Alba Ribera Martínez, an assistant professor in law and technology at VU Amsterdam, warned the approach could have consequences beyond Apple. "I think this approach is quite dangerous," she told Courthouse News, saying it could mean "none of the decisions closing market investigations under the DMA could be appealed before the courts."

The designation requires Apple to gradually open parts of its ecosystem to rivals, Courthouse News reported. The court's ruling leaves those obligations in place.