The European Union’s General Court (EuG) has ruled that Microsoft’s Edge browser does not qualify as a “gatekeeper” under the Digital Markets Act (DMA), despite surpassing the quantitative thresholds for such a designation. The decision, issued on September 2, 2026, and referencing case number T-357/24, confirms the European Commission’s stance that the browser is not significant enough to warrant the strict regulations imposed on major tech platforms. The court’s ruling means Edge will not be subject to these same competitive restrictions.
Gatekeepers under the DMA face specific obligations designed to ensure fair competition. These companies must not prefer their own products over rivals when operating on their designated platforms. The Commission has designated major players like Microsoft for its Windows operating system and the professional network LinkedIn with this status.
The case originated from a legal challenge by Opera Norway, the publisher of the Opera browser. The company argued that the Commission made an error when it excluded Edge from the gatekeeper list in early 2024. However, the General Court rejected this claim, finding that the Commission’s decision was legally sound and supported by evidence.
While the Commission noted that Edge is well-integrated into the Microsoft ecosystem—particularly through its pre-installation on Windows—the court found this factor insufficient. The judges argued that the Commission was correct to prioritize market share and user volume over mere ecosystem integration. This approach suggests that a product’s utility and reach are more critical determinants for gatekeeper status than its default availability on a dominant operating system.
Related: OLG: Exit Lease, Escape Liability
Historically, regulators have struggled to define the boundaries of digital market relevance. This ruling adds to that pattern, showing that the EU is willing to look past simple defaults to assess a service’s actual economic power. It signals that being the “default” choice is not automatically enough to trigger the DMA’s strict oversight, especially when direct user adoption remains relatively low.
The court clarified that the quantitative thresholds set out in the DMA are not the only factors used to determine gatekeeper status. The Commission is permitted to weigh all relevant circumstances when making these assessments. In the case of Edge, the court agreed that the browser’s user base was too small to classify it as a vital gateway to digital markets.
Furthermore, the judges acknowledged that Microsoft’s control over the service is limited. The Commission correctly pointed out that the browser’s technical design prevents Microsoft from exerting total influence over the service, which further weakened its case for gatekeeper designation. This distinction is important because it highlights that the DMA targets services where the gatekeeper holds disproportionate control over the market.
