By -

Snapshot

  • The Epic Games cases against Apple and Google mark a watershed moment, proving that Australian competition law can hold powerful digital platforms to account.
  • Yet, relying on litigation alone is far from ideal—court battles are slow, costly and strain the legal system.
  • This article unpacks the good, the bad and the ugly implications of the Epic Games litigation, highlighting the need for long-promised reform.

The Epic Games litigation against Apple and Google in Australia is the first major test of Australian competition law’s ability to deal with anti-competitive conduct by US Big Tech digital platforms. The test has been passed so far but victory laps would be premature.

Four proceedings were tried together—one against Apple (Epic Games, Inc v Apple Inc [2025] FCA 900 (‘Epic Games v Apple’)), another against Google (Epic Games, Inc v Google LLC [2025] FCA 901 (‘Epic Games v Google’)), and class actions against both (Anthony v Apple Inc; McDonald v Google LLC [2025] FCA 902). Apple and Google were found liable for misuse of market power in breach of section 46 of the Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (Cth) (‘CCA’). Remedies are yet to be considered.

You've reached the end of this article preview

There's more to read! Subscribe to LSJ today to access the rest of our updates, articles and multimedia content.

Subscribe to LSJ

Already an LSJ subscriber or Law Society member? Sign in to read the rest of the article.

Sign in to read more