
On Wednesday, Meta’s attempt to withhold numerous documents was unsuccessful as EU authorities investigate the parent company of Facebook and Instagram for potential anticompetitive behavior.
The European Commission requested documents from the tech giant, which they claimed were too broad and didn’t meet data privacy standards. However, the General Court of the Court of Justice of the European Union ordered Meta to comply, reported Reuters.
The ruling made on Wednesday in Luxembourg states that the European Commission’s requests were deemed necessary and appropriate.
During the period of March through November in 2019, the commission made several requests for Meta’s internal documents regarding the company’s use of data from its apps. Meta partially complied with the requests, however, it also contested some of the demands that were deemed too extensive.
Related: EU-US To Create New Data Transfer Agreement In Wake Of Meta Fine
Brussels requested Meta to provide all internal documents related to specific search queries, such as “big question,” “for free,” and “not good for us,” among others. However, Meta claims that the commission asked for documents related to 2,500 terms and that many of these terms would result in hundreds of documents that are completely unrelated to the investigation.
The commission reduced their requests after mediation, but Meta filed a complaint with the court in 2020 stating that Brussels’ demands were excessive.
Meta’s legal team referred to the EU’s investigation as an expansive search, comparing it to a fishing trawler collecting everything on the ocean floor, during a hearing in June of 2022.
Belgian Authorities Detain Multiple Individuals Over Alleged Huawei Bribery in EU Parliament

Belgian prosecutors have taken several individuals into custody in connection with an alleged bribery scheme within the European Parliament, purportedly for the benefit of Chinese telecommunications giant Huawei. The authorities conducted extensive searches on Thursday as part of their investigation into suspected corruption.
According to Reuters, investigators searched 21 locations across Belgium and Portugal, uncovering evidence related to the case. In addition, a judge ordered the sealing of the offices of two parliamentary assistants, federal prosecutors confirmed. Authorities in Belgium emphasized that the corruption had allegedly been carried out “very discreetly” since 2021 under the guise of commercial lobbying. The purported scheme involved financial incentives and lavish gifts, including extravagant dining, travel expenses, and invitations to high-profile football matches, per Reuters.
Huawei responded to the allegations by stating that it takes the accusations seriously and will engage with authorities to gain a clear understanding of the situation. The company affirmed its strict compliance with legal and regulatory standards. “Huawei has a zero-tolerance policy towards corruption or other wrongdoing, and we are committed to complying with all applicable laws and regulations at all times,” the company stated.
Read more: EU Commission Approves Nokia’s $2.3 Billion Acquisition of Infinera
Belgian prosecutors asserted that those detained are being questioned regarding corruption, forgery, and the use of falsified documents. While one suspect was arrested in France, authorities have not disclosed the identities of any individuals involved, nor have they provided information that could lead to their identification.
The European Parliament acknowledged receipt of a request from Belgian authorities for assistance in the investigation and stated that it would cooperate fully and swiftly, per Reuters.
Source: Reuters
Featured News
Belgian Authorities Detain Multiple Individuals Over Alleged Huawei Bribery in EU Parliament
Mar 13, 2025 by
CPI
Grubhub’s Antitrust Case to Proceed in Federal Court, Second Circuit Rules
Mar 13, 2025 by
CPI
Pharma Giants Mallinckrodt and Endo to Merge in Multi-Billion-Dollar Deal
Mar 13, 2025 by
CPI
FTC Targets Meta’s Market Power, Calls Zuckerberg to Testify
Mar 13, 2025 by
CPI
French Watchdog Approves Carrefour’s Expansion, Orders Store Sell-Off
Mar 13, 2025 by
CPI
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – Self-Preferencing
Feb 26, 2025 by
CPI
Platform Self-Preferencing: Focusing the Policy Debate
Feb 26, 2025 by
Michael Katz
Weaponized Opacity: Self-Preferencing in Digital Audience Measurement
Feb 26, 2025 by
Thomas Hoppner & Philipp Westerhoff
Self-Preferencing: An Economic Literature-Based Assessment Advocating a Case-By-Case Approach and Compliance Requirements
Feb 26, 2025 by
Patrice Bougette & Frederic Marty
Self-Preferencing in Adjacent Markets
Feb 26, 2025 by
Muxin Li