The legal battle over App Store commissions takes a turn in London: a specialized court has ruled against Apple after a key trial regarding its conduct in the app distribution market. At the heart of the dispute is the accusation that the company applied disproportionate commissions to developers and limited access alternatives for users.
The ruling, issued by the Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT), comes amid a wave of scrutiny targeting large platforms in Europe and the United States. According to the ruling, for several years Apple maintained conditions that, in the court's opinion, restricted competition and resulted in flight attendants partially transferred to UK consumers.
What the CAT ruling establishes
The court finds it proven that, between October 2015 and the end of 2020, Apple exercised a dominant position by excluding competition in the distribution of applications and in purchases within the App Store. During that period, the conditions imposed would have contributed to make operations more expensive for developers and users.
To measure the impact, the court took as a reference a 17,5% commission for app purchases compared to the rate typically applied by Apple, close to 30%. From this difference, the CAT concludes that around 50% of the extra cost was passed on to the final price for consumers.
This assessment does not yet close the chapter on compensation: the ruling establishes a criterion on the behavior and its effect, but points to a later phase in which the methodology for calculating compensation will be specified and, where appropriate, the economic scope for the affected parties.
Who is affected and the money at stake
The class action was filed on behalf of approximately 20 million users iPhone and iPad users in the UK who paid for apps or subscriptions during the period analyzed. The claim, if successful, could reach up to £1.500 billion, although the final amount will depend on how the calculations are made.
The court has set a hearing for next month to decide on the method of quantifying damages and Apple's request for permission to appeal. Until then, the ruling already establishes that there was a cost overrides to developers and a portion was passed on to consumers.
The lawsuit was brought forward by British academic Rachael Kent, who argued that the mobile store's design provided extraordinary benefits by limiting alternative distribution and collection channels. With the CAT's criteria now established, the discussion shifts to how to repair the damage and at what pace.
Apple's stance and the European regulatory landscape
Apple has announced that it will appeal, arguing that the ruling reflects a misconception of the app ecosystem, which, according to the company, provides a safe environment and an effective platform for monetization. In its defense, the tech company often emphasizes that the App Store provides security, trust and visibility to developers and users.
The British case coincides with increased regulatory scrutiny in the European Union, following rules designed to oversee large digital platforms. In addition to this ruling, the company faces complaints to European competition authorities by Terms and Conditions of your store and the rates applied to different business models.
This increasingly demanding regulatory environment, which includes the new European framework for gatekeepers, is forcing adjustments to app store policies. The CAT's decision is read as part of a broader patchwork in which regulators seek to increase contestability of the market and moderate commissions considered excessive.
Class actions: a before and after in the United Kingdom
This is the first major class action lawsuit against a tech giant to go to trial under Britain's still-young class action regime, which is now a decade old and beginning to consolidate its position. Although success for consumers has been limited so far, this milestone could boost new cases and accelerate others in progress.
Significant proceedings are already on the agenda: a case against Google over Play Store commissions is scheduled for October 2026, which will be heard alongside a claim from Epic Games. At the same time, other companies such as Amazon and Microsoft are facing lawsuits. similar reproaches before the CAT itself, a sign of growing judicial pressure on the rules of the platforms.
Possible effects in Spain and the rest of Europe
Although the ruling was issued in London, its reading could resonate in the European market, where the debate over fees, access, and competition in app stores is fully underway. A judicial ruling questioning the proportionality of certain fees could influence future trading conditions and in the negotiation between platforms and developers in the EU.
For European developers - including Spanish ones - the precedent provides ammunition to demand charging structures that are more in line with the value of the service, while for users the realization that part of the extra cost was passed on to prices reinforces the expectation of more contained rates or of possible compensation if compensation mechanisms are established.
The key, in any case, will be the hearing that will determine how the damages are calculated and whether Apple is granted permission to appeal. Until then, the court's conclusion that there was abuse of a dominant position and overpricing for five years remains on the table, which fits with the European trend toward review the rules of the big app stores already opening the door to more competition.
With the facts established by the court, the process enters its decisive phase: finalizing compensation, settling the appeal, and observing the domino effect on other litigation and European regulation. All this while Apple tries to defend its model and the players in the app ecosystem measure the real impact of commissions in the spotlight.
