British justice has dealt a blow to Apple by concluding that abused his dominant position with the commissions from its App Store, in a collective proceeding that could result in millions of dollars in compensation for those affected.
The Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) ruled that, between October 2015 and the end of 2020, the company applied excessive and unfair rates and restricted competition, a verdict that opens the door to compensation for millions of UK users.
The CAT ruling: abuse of position and overpricing
The action was initiated by British academic Rachael Kent on behalf of nearly 20 million users of iPhone and iPad, claiming that Apple extracted extraordinary profits by limiting alternative ways to distribute apps and process payments within them.
According to the court, developers were overcharged by the difference between a 17,5% referral fee and the rate that Apple usually placed at 30%, and approximately half of that extra cost was passed on to consumers.
The accredited conduct covers the period from October 2015 to the end of 2020, when the store's structure and conditions would have closed effective competition both in distribution and in integrated purchasing.
This is the first major class action lawsuit against a technology company to go to trial under the UK class action regime, a milestone that the CAT places in an environment of increasing scrutiny on digital platforms.
The claim has been valued at up to 1.500 million pounds, although a hearing scheduled for next month will determine the method of calculating damages and whether Apple is granted formal permission to appeal.
Apple's response and the arguments in dispute
Apple has expressed its strong disagreement with the ruling, arguing that it misrepresents a thriving and competitive app economy, arguing that the App Store provides a safe environment for both users and developers.
The company emphasizes that close to 85% of the apps They do not pay a commission (as they are not paid and do not include in-app purchases) and remember their program for small businesses, which reduces the rate to 15% in certain cases starting in 2021.
Despite these arguments, the CAT considered that Apple did not justify the proportionality of its commissions nor did it prove that they existed. real and viable alternatives in the market to avoid the identified additional costs.
In parallel, the decision comes after complaints to European regulators and in a context of new obligations for large platforms under the community framework, which seeks to moderate commissions and open the market to more competition.
Impact and European context: what changes for users and developers
For the affected British public, the court has held that a portion of the surcharge—approximately 50% of the differential—was ultimately reflected in prices and subscriptions, pending final compensation.
Developers in Spain and the rest of Europe could find in this precedent support to demand conditions more adjusted to the value of the service, while users expect that Prices and rates will be pressured downwards if the rules change.
The case adds to other relevant proceedings: a class action lawsuit over the commissions of the Google Play Store, which will be heard alongside a claim from Epic Games, and there are similar investigations affecting Amazon and Microsoft.
The next steps involve the hearing that will determine the quantification methodology and Apple's request to appeal, in a European scenario where the new framework for "gatekeepers" drives more contestability in app stores.
With the verdict already on the table, the sector awaits a definition on the compensation and a possible appeal, while a feeling spreads that the App Store commissions will have to undergo a more in-depth review in the United Kingdom and, consequently, in Europe.
