Google is arguing it shouldn’t have to pay about $370,000 in legal fees and other costs the Competition Commissioner is seeking after the tech giant lost a constitutional challenge.
In a new filing made with the Competition Tribunal on Monday, Google says it should be spared from paying the money because of the public interest element of this case.
Meanwhile, the Competition Bureau’s lawyers say in its own submission that Google should have to pay $370,096.88 in fees for the watchdog’s legal representation, experts, transcripts and printing because they are “reasonable, necessary and justified.”
The battle over court costs comes a few weeks after the Competition Tribunal dismissed a constitutional challenge that formed part of a broader case where Google has been accused by the bureau of causing harm through an allegedly outsized hold on the online advertising world.
Constitutional challenges question acts that could violate someone’s rights or freedoms and often end up being precedent-setting.
In this case, Google’s failed challenge took aim at a $91 billion penalty the company would have to pay if the tribunal eventually sides with the Competition Bureau, which alleges the tech firm abused its dominant position in online advertising.
Google argued the fee is so big it would violate the company’s constitutional rights, which the bureau disputed.
Judge Andrew Little took the bureau’s side, ruling the fine the company could face is “hypothetical at best” but “may be necessary to deter non-compliance.”
Now, having lost the challenge, Google wants to avoid paying any fees or at least, see them greatly reduced.
In its submission, it pointed to a previous tribunal ruling which waived costs for Visa because it advanced a “novel” argument.
“Without parties like Google who are willing to bring novel challenges, ’[g]aps in our law and policy will not be identified or remedied,’” the tech company said, citing in part the ruling in the credit card company’s case.
If the tribunal decides Google should have to pay the fees, the company says they should be “significantly reduced” because of its public interest argument and acting commissioner Jeanne Pratt’s failure to prevail on one of her primary arguments.
The company also says any fees should be lower than those featured in other cases “to strike a fair and reasonable balance between compensating a successful party and not unduly burdening an unsuccessful party.”
The Competition Bureau says in its own submission that Google should have to pay because “responding to the motion was also substantially more work for the commissioner than a motion of average or usual complexity.”
Google’s motion alone totalled more than 10,000 pages, included 29 volumes with four affidavits and two expert reports, the bureau said. The Commissioner’s motion was made up of 11 volumes with a single affidavit and expert report.
The motion took five cross-examinations, and a hearing spanned 3 1/2 days.
As for Google’s take that the fees should be reduced because one of the commissioner’s arguments didn’t sway Little, the bureau’s lawyers said, “a successful party should not be penalized simply because not all the points advanced by that party have found favour with the court.”
The bureau under Pratt’s predecessor Matthew Boswell launched its broader fight against Google in November. A lawsuit Boswell filed claimed Google unlawfully tied together its ad tech tools — DoubleClick for Publishers, AdX, Display & Video 360 and Google Ad — to maintain its market dominance and lessen competition.
Google maintains ad buyers have plenty of choice despite the hold it has on the market.
This report by The Canadian Press was first published March 24, 2026.
