Apple’s antitrust case in the U.K. has been dismissed by the courts again, with the U.K. competition regulator unable to sanction it because it missed the statutory deadline, despite two of its App Store policies being found to be monopolistic. The latter is likely to appeal again, but the outcome is not yet known.
The antitrust case arose from two Apple App Store policies, one of which prohibits Apple from offering cloud gaming services on the App Store, meaning developers cannot offer an app that allows multiple games to be played through cloud servers. This was seen as an attempt by Apple to protect its share of the revenue from its own games and reduce the competition faced by its own Apple Arcade subscription game service. Second, while Apple allows any developer to create their own web browser and make it available on the App Store, it only approves browsers that use its own WebKit rendering engine. This prevents developers from making a browser app that is faster than Safari, and Apple has limited some Safari features, such as Apple Pay integration.
Last June, the UK’s Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) investigated both of Apple’s policies and found that they were indeed monopolistic. However, because the CMA previously referred to its investigation as a “market study” rather than a “market investigation,” which is the only legal authority it has to impose sanctions, the CMA could not impose sanctions on Apple. So the CMA was unable to take any action against Apple. To address this issue, the CMA reopened a new case on the same two issues, this time labeling it as a “market investigation.
Apple, however, argued that the CMA had missed the deadline to open the investigation. This is because the law states that the regulator “shall” open an investigation on the same day it releases its preliminary findings. Apple argues that the word “shall” means the same as “must,” while the CMA argues that the word “shall” simply gives it the authority, not the obligation, to open an investigation immediately. While Apple’s interpretation seemed more reasonable, there was actually legal precedent on both sides to support their arguments, so the CMA appealed to the Competition Appeal Tribunal.
Outsiders argued at the time that Apple appeared to have the better position, and that was confirmed by today’s ruling, in which the Competition Appeal Tribunal rejected the CMA’s decision to open an investigation and on Wednesday denied the CMA’s application to appeal the decision, according to Reuters. In its decision denying the application for appeal, the tribunal said the law on when the CMA can open a market investigation is clear. “The letter of the law is important, even if it produces undesirable or unfortunate results.” The court said.
That may not be the end of the case, however. the CMA can still take its case to the U.K. Supreme Court, and the regulator has not yet said whether it will do so, only that it is carefully considering the court’s decision and considering its next steps.
Apple’s antitrust case in the U.K. has sparked widespread industry and public concern as it relates to the way the App Store operates as one of the world’s largest mobile app marketplaces. Apple has maintained that its App Store policies are designed to protect the security and privacy of its users and to provide a high-quality app experience. However, some developers and regulators have argued that Apple has used its App Store monopoly to limit competition and innovation, to the detriment of consumers and developers.
Apple is currently facing similar antitrust charges and investigations in other countries and regions, such as the United States, the European Union, Japan, and South Korea. The outcome of these cases could have a significant impact on Apple’s business and reputation, and could also change the landscape and rules of the mobile app market. Therefore, Apple’s antitrust case in the UK is far from over, and there are more variables and challenges ahead.
