Apple Inc. and Apple Distribution International are asking the EU General Court to annul a €1.84B European Commission fine over App Store anti-steering rules for music streaming apps. Apple challenges the market definition, the dominance and abuse findings, and the fine, and the action remains pending. The General Court has rescheduled the hearing for December 9 and 10, 2026.
Latest development Sep 4, 2026
On September 4, 2026, MLex reported that the General Court had moved the hearing in Apple’s annulment action from November 25 and 26 to December 9 and 10, 2026.
Why it matters
The General Court will decide whether the European Commission can use Article 102 to fine app store anti-steering rules and add a large lump-sum deterrence amount. The judgment will shape how the Commission polices app store rules alongside the Digital Markets Act (DMA).
Background
The European Commission investigated Apple’s App Store rules for music streaming apps under Article 102 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU). The investigation focused on anti-steering provisions. These stopped developers such as Spotify from telling iOS users, inside their own apps, about cheaper ways to subscribe outside the App Store.
On March 4, 2024, the Commission found that Apple had abused a dominant position in the distribution of music streaming apps to iPhone and iPad users. It imposed a fine of about €1.84B. The fine included a large lump-sum amount that the Commission said was needed for deterrence, given Apple’s size and resources.
On May 16, 2024, Apple and its Irish distribution unit, Apple Distribution International, filed an annulment action at the General Court of the European Union in Luxembourg. They asked the court to annul the decision or, in the alternative, to annul Article 3 in part or reduce the fine. Apple argues that the Commission defined the relevant market wrongly and wrongly found dominance and abuse. It also contends that the fine is miscalculated and disproportionate, pointing in particular to the size of the deterrence component.
The General Court first set the hearing for November 25 and 26, 2026. In September 2026, MLex reported that the court had moved the hearing to December 9 and 10, 2026. No judgment has been issued. Any General Court judgment can be appealed to the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU). Separately, Apple’s obligations under the EU Digital Markets Act (DMA) target anti-steering conduct going forward. The Article 102 case concerns whether the Commission was right to fine Apple’s pre-DMA conduct and whether the size of the fine can stand.
Timeline 4 events
-
OrderGeneral Court moves hearing to December 9–10, 2026
MLex reported that the General Court moved the hearing in Apple’s annulment action from November 25–26, 2026.
Apple gets new Dec. 9-10 hearing in EU court appeal against antitrust fine
-
HearingGeneral Court sets hearing for November 25–26, 2026
The General Court initially scheduled the hearing in Apple’s annulment action for late November 2026.
Apple given November hearing in appeal against €1.8bn EU antitrust fine
-
FilingApple files annulment action at the EU General Court
Apple Inc. and Apple Distribution International asked the General Court to annul the Commission’s decision, or in the alternative to annul Article 3 in part or reduce the fine.
Apple's action against Commission's decision imposing a fine for abusive App Store rules for music streaming providers, published in OJApple Fires Back Against $1.95B Streaming Music Fine in the EUApple appeals huge EU fine for music streaming restrictions
-
OtherEuropean Commission fines Apple €1.84B
The Commission found Apple had abused its dominant position by imposing anti-steering rules that stopped music streaming apps from informing iOS users of cheaper subscription options outside the App Store.
Commission fines Apple over €1.8 billion over abusive App store rules for music streaming providersApple fined €1.84BN in EU over anti-steering on iOS music streaming market
Experimental AI forecast
How it is madeHow will the EU General Court rule on Apple’s action to annul the €1.84 billion music streaming anti-steering fine by June 30, 2028?
- Court cuts fine or partly annuls34%
- Still pending on June 30, 202825%
- Court upholds Commission fine in full24%
- Court annuls Commission decision15%
- Apple withdraws its action2%
- Resolves by
- Jun 30, 2028in 20 months
- Record confidence
- Medium
The most likely result, at 34%, is that the General Court upholds at least part of the infringement but cuts the €1.84 billion fine or partly annuls the decision by June 30, 2028. The strongest reason is the unusually large lump-sum deterrence amount, which sits far above the conventionally calculated base fine and invites proportionality review.
How it resolves. Resolves on the operative part of the first General Court judgment in Apple’s annulment action (T-286/24 or its correct number) published on or before June 30, 2028. “Fine upheld in full” means the action is dismissed in its entirety. “Fine cut or decision partly annulled” means the court upholds the infringement finding in whole or in part but annuls part of the decision or reduces the fine. “Decision annulled” means the infringement finding and the fine are annulled in their entirety. “Apple withdraws” means the case is removed from the register on Apple’s discontinuance. “Still pending” applies if none of these has occurred by June 30, 2028. A later appeal to the Court of Justice does not affect resolution.
Reasoning
Starting point. General Court judgments in large Article 102 fine challenges against major technology firms (Intel, Qualcomm, Google Shopping, Google Android): In recent large Article 102 tech cases, the General Court fully upheld roughly a third, reduced fines or partly annulled roughly a third, and fully annulled roughly a third. Judgments typically follow the hearing by 9 to 20 months.
The hearing is set for December 9 and 10, 2026, and General Court judgments in major Article 102 cases have usually followed hearings by about 9 to 20 months. A roughly 18-month window after the hearing makes a judgment more likely than not, but leaves about a 25% chance the case is still pending. On the merits, recent large tech Article 102 cases split roughly evenly among full dismissal (Google Shopping), fine reduction (Google Android), and full annulment (Intel, Qualcomm). The fine structure matters most. The Commission added a lump sum for deterrence that makes up most of the fine, and that is the most exposed element under proportionality and guideline review. The infringement theory treats anti-steering rules as unfair trading conditions harming consumers, and it rests on a narrow market for iOS music streaming app distribution. That theory is contestable but aligns with the policy behind the Digital Markets Act, which may make the court reluctant to reject it outright. Full annulment is the leading alternative to a reduction and would most likely turn on market definition or proof of effects. Withdrawal is unlikely given the sums at stake and the precedent value for Apple. The record has no interim rulings, counsel, or panel details, so the merits split relies mainly on base rates.
Large lump-sum deterrence component vulnerable on proportionality · Narrow iOS music streaming market definition is contestable · Hearing on December 9 and 10, 2026 sets judgment timing · Mixed General Court record in recent tech Article 102 cases · DMA policy alignment may support the core infringement finding
Generated automatically by Claude Opus 5.5 on Sep 24, 2026 from this case’s record on this site, and published without editorial review. The probabilities are the model’s judgment, not measured frequencies, and they are scored publicly as cases resolve. Not legal or investment advice. How the forecasts are made