Google faces private damages claims across Europe that could reach $10 billion, after the company lost its first case under the European Union's Digital Markets Act and absorbed a $1 billion fine for favouring its own services in the Google Play store.

The lawsuits, filed by smaller rivals in several European countries, open a new front in almost two decades of antitrust pressure on the technology giant. Alphabet, Google's parent, is already contesting more than €10.4 billion in EU antitrust fines imposed over the past decade — the latest DMA penalty marks the fifth and sixth fines European authorities have levied against the company.

What did the DMA ruling decide?

The European Commission fined Google $1 billion under the Digital Markets Act for allegedly restricting app developers from directing users to cheaper purchasing options outside Google Play. The decision is the Commission's first DMA loss for Google and, according to legal experts, clears the path for businesses to seek compensation in national courts.

"I think this will trigger a new wave of litigation," said Thomas Höppner, a partner at Geradin Partners, which advised German price comparison platform Idealo in a market abuse case. Höppner said specialised search firms may claim damages not only for DMA breaches but also for earlier conduct under Article 102 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, which prohibits abuse of a dominant market position.

How strong are the follow-on claims?

Google's European legal troubles began in 2008, when it started prominently displaying its own comparison shopping service in search results. The European Commission's investigation produced a €2.42 billion antitrust fine in 2017 — a decision Google unsuccessfully challenged before Europe's highest court last year.

Damages actions building on that ruling are already producing results:

• In November, a Berlin court awarded Idealo €465 million ($528.9 million), one of the largest antitrust awards a German court has ever granted.
• In July, a Stockholm court ordered Google to pay approximately $1.97 billion, including interest, in the PriceRunner case.
• PriceRunner, backed by Klarna, filed a multibillion-dollar lawsuit in 2022 after Google's appeal against the EU shopping decision failed.
• UK-based Kelkoo is seeking billions of pounds in damages.
• Litigation funder LitFin backs two groups suing Google in Amsterdam over shopping auctions, seeking more than $1 billion combined.

Kelkoo Chief Executive Richard Stables told Reuters the DMA decision strengthens ongoing claims. "We expect these to be impacted somewhat by the DMA decision because it shows that Google is still self-referencing even to this day," Stables said.

LitFin Chief Operating Officer Matej Pardo said more cases are in the pipeline. "There are already a lot of these claims being filed, and probably more that are being prepared," he said.

What does the ruling change for practitioners?

For claimant firms, the DMA decision supplies a fresh, recent evidentiary basis for follow-on actions, and it can be combined with the finalised 2017 shopping judgment under Article 102 TFEU to argue continuing self-preferencing conduct. For Google's counsel, the immediate priorities are any challenge to the $1 billion DMA fine and managing appeals that historically stretch for years. Klarna's legal counsel, Pontus Scherp, said the company does not expect payment of the Stockholm award anytime soon: "We can expect an appeal to take over a year, and likely years."

What has Google said?

Google dismissed the lawsuits as baseless. "We strongly disagree with these lawsuits, which are brought by companies looking for a payout instead of investing in their own products," a company spokesperson said.

Marco Pescarmona, chairman of Moltiply Group, another complainant, praised the legislation itself but questioned enforcement. "The DMA is a very good piece of legislation. The defect maybe is that it's so effective that they're afraid to use it," he said.

Will the litigation take years?

Legal experts say Google may continue to benefit from lengthy court processes. LitFin's Pardo noted that almost two decades elapsed between the alleged shopping search abuses and the exhaustion of Google's appeals, and warned some cases could take up to eight years to resolve. He described regulatory fines as "a cost of doing business" for the company.

"By that time, they've already monopolised many markets," Pardo said.

The claims also land at a sensitive financial moment for Alphabet. The company is increasing spending on artificial intelligence, and reported negative free cash flow in the second quarter — its first since going public.