The General Court annulled the Commission’s designation of Marketplace under the Digital Markets Act, faulting its reasoning, while upholding the same label for Messenger.
Meta walked into the EU’s General Court asking it to strike down two gatekeeper labels and walked out having shed one. On 3 June the Luxembourg court annulled the European Commission’s designation of Facebook Marketplace as a “core platform service” under the Digital Markets Act, while upholding the same designation for Messenger. It is a split decision, and the reasons for the split matter more than the scoreline.
The court did not find that Marketplace is harmless or unimportant. It found that the Commission had not explained itself properly. The decision, the judges held, “does not satisfy the requirements in terms of reasoning as regards Marketplace,” failing to take account of recent developments in the service and leaving neither Meta nor the courts able to understand or review why it had been classified as a regulated gateway. That is an annulment on procedural grounds, not a ruling that Marketplace falls outside the DMA’s reach.
The distinction is the whole story. The Digital Markets Act lets the Commission designate the largest platforms as “gatekeepers” and impose standing obligations on them, interoperability, limits on self-preferencing, restrictions on combining user data, without litigating each case as a separate abuse.
The regime’s speed and breadth are its point, and also its vulnerability: when a regulator can label a service a gateway and attach heavy obligations to it, the quality of the reasoning behind the label is what stops the power from becoming arbitrary. The court has now told the Commission its Marketplace reasoning did not clear that bar.
For Messenger, the same scrutiny produced the opposite result. Meta failed to overturn the 2023 decision subjecting the messaging service to tighter regulation, and the gatekeeper obligations on it stand.
Meta got a fuller hearing on both services and a divided verdict, which is arguably a more useful outcome for the law than a clean win for either side, because it shows the court willing to police the Commission’s reasoning without dismantling the regime.
The practical effect on Marketplace is limited and probably temporary. An annulment for inadequate reasoning is the kind of defeat a regulator can cure: the Commission can issue a fresh designation with the analysis the court found missing, this time addressing the developments it overlooked. Meta has bought time and a procedural point rather than a permanent exemption, and the company will know it.
What the ruling does is sharpen the terms of the DMA fight rather than settle it. Meta and Apple have both mounted legal challenges to their treatment under the act, and the broader contest between Brussels and the large American platforms has been less about whether the rules apply than about how, and on what evidence, they are imposed.
Wednesday’s judgment lands squarely in that argument: it leaves the DMA’s architecture intact while insisting the Commission show its working.
For everyone watching the act’s durability, that is the signal worth taking. The General Court has not weakened the gatekeeper regime; it has demanded the regulator wield it with better-documented reasoning. Brussels tends to write the rule first and refine the enforcement afterwards, and this is the refinement arriving. The Commission keeps its powers. It now has to use them more carefully, and Marketplace is the case that made the point.
I’ve driven a lot of EVs lately, and many of them seem obsessed with feeling futuristic at all costs. Some are great tech showcases, but not all of them are particularly easy to live with day to day.
The 2026 Polestar 3 Dual Motor Performance is different because it doesn’t lean into that over-the-top EV personality. It feels like a proper luxury SUV first, and an electric vehicle second.
With 680 horsepower on tap, it’s seriously quick when you want it to be. But the real story is how normal it feels when you’re just going about daily driving.
Pros
Cons
Feels more like a normal luxury SUV than a typical EV
Strong performance
Excellent interior quality
Firm ride
Smaller cargo space than rivals
Expensive options that put the price up quickly
A luxury SUV first, an EV second
It behaves more like a traditional premium SUV than a futuristic EV
The first thing you notice about the 2026 Polestar 3 is how little it tries to act like a typical EV. It doesn’t lean on gimmicks or exaggerated futuristic styling cues.
Instead, it feels like a well-sorted luxury SUV that just happens to be electric. That approach instantly separates it from much of the competition.
The steering feels natural, and the ride is controlled without feeling overly soft or disconnected. It avoids the detached “floating tech pod” sensation that some EVs still struggle with.
Even in Performance trim, it never feels dramatic for the sake of it. Everything is tuned around calmness and everyday usability.
This EV SUV surprised me—it’s packed with space and comfort, even if the drive itself is a bit mellow.
A driving position that feels more focused than expected
Lower, tighter, and more engaging than a large SUV has any right to be
Credit: Adam Gray | How-To Geek
You sit lower in the Polestar 3 than you might expect for a large SUV. That gives it a slightly cocooned driving position that feels more focused than most rivals.
At first, it almost feels like you’re in something smaller and more sports-oriented. That illusion works especially well in everyday driving.
But the reality check comes when you push harder. The weight shows up under braking and reminds you what this really is.
Most functions are handled through a large central touchscreen running Google’s system. It looks excellent, but it takes time to get used to.
Core controls like drive settings and climate adjustments aren’t instantly accessible. It keeps the cabin visually clean but less immediate in use.
There are also quirks like relocated rear window switches and unlabeled steering wheel buttons. They don’t ruin the experience, but they do take time to learn.
BMW has just revealed its all-new 2026 iX3, a sleek electric SUV designed to rival Tesla with cutting-edge tech, bold design, and impressive range.
A surprisingly roomy and practical luxury SUV
Family-friendly space despite the coupe-like profile
Credit: Adam Gray | How-To Geek
Rear seat space is one of the Polestar 3’s strongest points. The five-seat layout allows generous legroom throughout.
Even taller passengers won’t struggle for space in the back. Headroom is slightly limited by the sloping roofline, but it doesn’t feel restrictive.
Cargo space is average for the class, with a shallow load floor and raised cargo area. You also get underfloor storage plus a small frunk for charging cables and small items.
Polestar has removed most physical controls in favor of a screen-first interior. That keeps the design clean but increases the learning curve.
The 14.5-inch display looks sharp and responds quickly, but key functions often take more steps than expected. Even simple adjustments aren’t always immediate.
It reinforces the modern EV feel, but it also highlights the tradeoff. This is where the “normal SUV feel” starts to give way to full EV complexity.
Hyundai’s flagship three-row EV gets a darker Black Ink makeover and the kind of upscale feel you’d normally expect from far pricier SUVs.
What’s new for 2026
A technical overhaul that fixes early shortcomings
Credit: Adam Gray | How-To Geek
The Polestar 3 had a difficult start to life, with delays and early software issues affecting its rollout. This update feels like the version it should have launched as.
The biggest change is the switch to an 800-volt electrical architecture. That brings much faster charging speeds and shorter stops on compatible fast chargers.
All versions also get new batteries and updated in-house motors. The lineup has been simplified into three clearer variants based on powertrain.
The Dual Motor Performance model now produces 680 horsepower. Despite that, it still feels more like a relaxed luxury SUV than a performance machine most of the time.
You should avoid these cars new, but used examples are a bargain.
Pricing and what you actually get for the money
Expensive, but it feels properly equipped before options get involved
Credit: Adam Gray | How-To Geek
The 2026 Polestar 3 starts at £71,540 ($91,000), rising to £79,540 ($101,000) for the Dual Motor and £87,040 ($111,000) for the Performance. That puts it firmly against the BMW iX and Mercedes EQE SUV rather than mainstream electric SUVs.
Standard equipment is strong across the range, with 20-inch alloy wheels, a 14.5-inch portrait touchscreen, a Bowers & Wilkins sound system, and a full suite of driver assistance tech. It feels well-equipped even before options enter the conversation.
Move up to the Dual Motor and you get dual-chamber air suspension and subtle Swedish gold detailing. The Performance model adds significant power, revised chassis tuning, gold Brembo brake calipers, and gold seatbelts.
Where costs rise is options. Paint starts at £1,000 ($1,270), while Bridge of Weir leather upholstery costs around £3,900 ($4,950).
Even so, it feels more complete out of the box than many rivals in this segment. The base price is high, but it doesn’t feel stripped back or artificially entry-level.
Subaru’s new three-row EV packs 420 horspower, real off-road chops, and enough space for the whole family—without feeling boring.
How-To Geek’s take
An EV that finally behaves like a normal car first
Credit: Adam Gray | How-To Geek
The updated Polestar 3 doesn’t try to reinvent what an electric SUV should be. Instead, it focuses on feeling familiar, calm, and easy to live with.
It still has compromises, including a firm ride and heavy touchscreen reliance. But it avoids the overly futuristic feel that turns some drivers away from EVs entirely.
That’s what makes it work. It feels like an electric SUV for people who don’t usually like electric SUVs, and it commits to that idea from start to finish.
To provide the best experiences, we use technologies like cookies to store and/or access device information. Consenting to these technologies will allow us to process data such as browsing behavior or unique IDs on this site. Not consenting or withdrawing consent, may adversely affect certain features and functions.
Functional
Always active
The technical storage or access is strictly necessary for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user, or for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network.
Preferences
The technical storage or access is necessary for the legitimate purpose of storing preferences that are not requested by the subscriber or user.
Statistics
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for statistical purposes.The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.
Marketing
The technical storage or access is required to create user profiles to send advertising, or to track the user on a website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes.
