The Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) has ruled that Google’s refusal to allow access to its Android Auto platform for Enel’s JuicePass app may constitute an abuse of market dominance. The decision, announced on Tuesday, could force major technology firms to ensure fairer competition by making their platforms more accessible to third-party applications.
The case originated in Italy, where the antitrust authority imposed a €102m fine on Google in 2021 for blocking Enel X Italia’s JuicePass app from Android Auto. JuicePass, launched in 2018, allows electric vehicle users to locate and reserve charging stations. Enel had sought integration with Android Auto to facilitate in-car navigation to these stations, but Google denied the request, citing security concerns and the lack of a required template for such applications.
Regulator claims Google’s restrictions limited consumer choice
According to Autorità Garante della Concorrenza e del Mercato (AGCM), Italy’s competition authority, Google’s decision restricted consumer choice by preventing drivers from using JuicePass while travelling, limiting its ability to compete against Google’s own mapping services. The regulator noted that JuicePass provided navigation as well as features for reserving and managing charging sessions. These capabilities were not yet available on Google Maps but could potentially be developed in the future. The authority argued that this conduct could hinder electric mobility expansion by reducing infrastructure accessibility.
Following the penalty, Google appealed to the Italian Council of State, which referred the matter to the CJEU for clarification. The court found that a dominant company’s refusal to ensure platform interoperability with a third-party app could be considered anticompetitive, particularly if the restriction made the app less attractive to consumers.
“A refusal by an undertaking in a dominant position to ensure that its platform is interoperable with an app of another undertaking, which thereby becomes more attractive, can be abusive,” the judgment stated.
However, the court recognised that refusal could be justified if no template existed for the app category in question or if integration would compromise platform security or integrity. If neither condition applied, the court ruled that the dominant company must create a template within a reasonable timeframe.
At the time of Enel’s request, Google maintained that Android Auto only supported multimedia and messaging apps and that adding new app categories required additional resources. The CJEU assessed whether Google’s refusal had hindered competition in the affected market and impacted the growth of third-party services.
The ruling also highlighted that while Android Auto was not indispensable for operating JuicePass, denying access could still have anticompetitive effects. Even if third-party competitors remained active in the market, the court stressed that their ability to compete effectively must be considered in light of such restrictions.
Google has since introduced the functionality Enel had requested but argued that, at the time of the dispute, the feature was relevant to only 0.04% of vehicles in Italy.
The Italian Council of State will now rule on Google’s appeal in line with the CJEU’s decision.
Read more: Google loses EU antitrust appeal, must pay €2.42bn fine for anti-competitive practices
