Enforcement of antitrust law in the digisphere – now also with AI

The events of 2025 clearly indicate the competition authorities’ new priorities, with recent court decisions playing into their hands.

Detecting breaches of EU competition law is made easier

In the Michelin case (Case T-188/24), the General Court of the European Union implicitly confirmed that the European Commission may legitimately initiate antitrust proceedings and conduct dawn raids on the basis of findings derived from AI-based screening of public information. This decision also highlights the risks of publicly disclosing strategic or sensitive information (see our Noerr Insights). The use of AI-assisted analysis tools is likely to become an integral part of competition authorities’ investigative practice, for example in the large-scale review of companies’ publications.

The Nuctech decision (Case C-720/24) by the Court of Justice of the European Union has further strengthened the European Commission’s powers in dawn raids: competition authorities may inspect data even if it is stored on servers outside the EU, provided that the subsidiary concerned has access to the data and that access may lead to findings of an infringement of EU competition law.

Focus on no-poach agreements and exchange of information

The European Commission’s €329 million fine imposed on Delivery Hero/Glovo attracted considerable attention. As already announced in its policy brief, the European Commission classified no-poach agreements as a restriction of competition by object. In view of the shortage of skilled workers, competition authorities’ focus on labour market-related agreements will continue to increase. Targeted compliance training for HR staff is therefore essential (see our Noerr Insights).

The Banco BPN judgment (Case C-298/22) by the Court of Justice of the European Union has significantly increased the risk of breaching EU competition law through information exchange between competitors. Even a single exchange can constitute a restriction of competition by object, without any need for further coordination based on the information exchanged (see our Noerr Insights). Accordingly, the authorities’ growing activity in this field is not surprising. Only recently, the European Commission opened an investigation into Deutsche Börse and Nasdaq (press release).

Digital issues dominate the enforcement regarding abuses of a dominant position

While the final version of the European Commission’s guidelines on exclusionary conduct is still a long time coming, the European Commission has by no means been idle and has initiated proceedings against SAP and Red Bull on suspicion of abuse of market power.

In its Android Auto decision (Case C-233/23), the Court of Justice of the European Union lowered the threshold for successful claims to access digital platforms (see our Noerr Insights).

In addition, the Federal Court of Justice’s (Bundesgerichtshof) “Steinbruch” decision (Case KZR-73/23) will predictably sharpen national controls on abuse of market power under section 20 of the German Act against Restraints of Competition (Gesetz gegen Wettbewerbsbeschränkungen). The decision confirms that even companies without traditional market dominance can come under scrutiny if dependencies exist and customers have limited opportunities to switch.

What’s coming in 2026?

What can be expected in 2026 are a closer integration of technological investigation instruments, strict standards for information exchanges and more refined controls on abusive conduct. Companies should scrutinise market communication, HR strategies and digital interfaces under EU competition law at an early stage and improve their compliance processes.

This article is part of the Competition Outlook 2026. You can find all Competition Outlook articles here.