EU Court Adviser Rejects Meta’s Challenge Over Massive Data Demands in Antitrust Investigation

A top EU court adviser has rejected Meta's attempt to block extensive data requests from antitrust regulators, marking a major win for EU competition enforcement.

By: AXL Media

Published: Feb 26, 2026, 4:41 AM EST

Source: The information in this article was sourced from Channel News Asia

The Breaking Development

A significant legal opinion was issued on February 26, 2026, by Advocate General Maciej Szpunar, advising Europe’s highest court to reject Meta Platforms’ challenge against the European Commission’s investigative powers. Meta had sought to limit the scope of information requests during two separate antitrust probes into its classified ads service and its use of data. Szpunar’s non-binding but highly influential opinion asserts that the Commission’s demands for a wide array of internal documents—which Meta had previously labeled as "aberrant" and irrelevant—are within the legal rights of the regulator to ensure thorough market oversight.

Background and Context

The dispute originates from 2020, when Meta sued the European Commission over demands for millions of documents containing specific keywords. Meta argued that the requests were so broad they would sweep up sensitive personal information of employees, such as medical records and political affiliations, that had no relevance to the competition investigation. In response, the EU enforcer agreed to a "data room" procedure where lawyers could vet documents, but Meta continued to fight the principle of the request. The current opinion follows a series of recent EU victories, including a nearly €800 million fine levied against Meta in late 2024 for tying Facebook Marketplace to its social network.

Key Players and Stakeholders

The primary stakeholders include Meta Platforms, led by CEO Mark Zuckerberg, and the European Commission’s competition department. Advocate General Szpunar plays a pivotal role as his legal reasoning often serves as the blueprint for the final CJEU judgment. Beyond the immediate parties, this case is closely watched by other technology giants, including Google and Amazon, as it defines the boundaries of what regulators can legally "see" when investigating potential abuses of dominant market positions in the digital economy.