Archive

Archive for June, 2026

The Foundem and Others v Google Trial 22 Jun to 27 Jul 2026

June 16th, 2026 No comments
Last Updated: 16 June 2026

The following is intended as a useful resource for anyone following or interested in the upcoming Trial in the Foundem (Infederation Ltd), Kelkoo, and Ciao vs Google cases, which is due to be heard before the UK Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) from 22 June to 27 July 2026.

Introduction

It was Foundem’s February 2010 competition complaint that triggered the European Commission’s seven-year investigation into Google’s search manipulation practices, which culminated in the June 2017 Prohibition Decision and record-breaking $2.7 billion fine.[1] In June 2012, Foundem filed a civil claim for damages against Google, but these proceedings were delayed pending the outcome of the European Commission’s investigation and Google’s two unsuccessful appeals of the ensuing Decision.

In June this year, Foundem’s civil claim against Google will finally come to trial before the Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) in London. As of March 2024, Foundem’s claim has been jointly case managed with Kelkoo and Ciao.

Check back for further information and updates in the coming days and weeks.

General Resources

Timeline of events leading up to the EC’s Prohibition Decision and the upcoming Trial before the CAT
Slides from a February 2010 presentation, summarising Foundem’s Competition Complaint
As Google prepares to (once again) portray Foundem’s innovative vertical search service as “valueless” spam, we provide the following historical comparison to Google’s own CSS at the time
Why relevance-based search results are the obvious remedy and counterfactual to Google’s anti-competitive Conduct
Slides from a December 2018 presentation, demonstrating that Google’s auction-based Compliance-Mechanism is not compliant with the Decision and not a remedy

Foundem-Specific Resources

It is clear that Google is once again intending to portray Foundem’s innovative, multi-domain vertical search service as some kind of low-quality, borderline spam site, just as it did to the European Commission (and anyone else who would listen) during the Commission’s seven-year investigation into the anti-competitive practices raised by our February 2010 competition complaint.

History shows that the European Commission examined these baseless accusations and resoundingly rejected them in the form of a Prohibition Decision and £2.1 billion fine. As the Commission found, Google abused its dominance of general search by artificially demoting competing CSSs to the nether regions of Google’s search results pages while artificially promoting its own CSS at or near the top of page 1. And, since Google’s failed Appeals, this clear deviation from competition on the merits has now been confirmed and upheld by both the General Court and Court of Justice of the European Union.

Yet here we are. So, despite our reluctance to re-engage with a battle that, in our view, Google has already fought and lost, the following presentations and documents provide some relevant information and historical context:

A summary of some of the partnerships and media recommendations that Foundem accrued, despite being effectively excluded from Google’s all-important search results

Examples of some of the positive user feedback that Foundem received over the years, despite its near invisibility in Google’s search results

A brief history of Foundem’s service and the very early stage at which it was struck with its devastating and unwarranted Google search penalty
A historical example of the devastating impact of Foundem’s Google search penalty, even in extreme cases where Foundem would have been the only truly relevant result

As above, a historical comparison of Foundem’s and Google’s CSSs. Also includes a brief summary of the configurable parametrised search technology underpinning Foundem’s service

 


[1] Foundem was also the first to raise Google’s double-sided search manipulation practices with the U.S. Department of Justice and Federal Trade Commission (May 2010), the Competition Commission of India (April 2011), the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (August 2011), and the Canadian Competition Bureau (September 2012).

Categories: Foundem, Google Tags: