Denmark found Wolt abused its dominance with parity clauses and one-sided discounts

On August 26, 2026, the Danish Competition Council found that Wolt Danmark ApS infringed Article 102 TFEU and its Danish equivalent in three ways: one exclusionary and two exploitative abuses of dominance in the market for meal-ordering platforms with delivery.

Wolt's market share rose from 50-60% to 70-80% during the investigated period of 2022-2024, and the authority concluded the market had with high probability tipped toward Wolt or was tipping. Rivals left while it grew: Foodora exited in June 2024, Dream Delivery ceased in summer 2024 and Just Eat left Denmark on April 30, 2026 - the only new entrant is Uber Eats, which arrived in 2026.

The three abuses came from standard agreements. A narrow price parity clause barred restaurants from undercutting Wolt on their own sales channels, keeping new competitors out and existing ones small. Wolt could unilaterally discount a restaurant's meals without its knowledge or consent, while parity blocked the restaurant from answering on its own channels. And it could pay complaining customers up to DKK 400 (about 50 euros) per order at the restaurant's expense, with restaurants bearing the full risk and no say in complaint handling.

The DCCA found unlawful conduct at least from January 1, 2022 to December 31, 2024, covering a very large number of restaurant agreements. Wolt said the standard terms were amended after the case was opened and that the price parity clause has not been applied in Denmark since December 4, 2025. The Council ordered Wolt to cease the conduct immediately, refrain from similar conduct, inform all restaurants on the platform and document that it has done so - and referred the case to the courts for a fine, since the DCCA cannot impose one itself.

Ordered to cease the conduct and notify every restaurant on the platform; the case is referred to Danish courts, which can impose a fine. Wolt is expected to challenge.

Network effects and single-homing consumers meant the market was tipping or had already tipped toward Wolt, giving its standard terms the power to lock in the lead.

The parity clause stopped restaurants from undercutting Wolt on their own channels, removing the main way challengers could differentiate on price.

Unilateral promotional discounts combined with parity created an asymmetry in which only Wolt controlled the competitive parameters of a restaurant's prices.

The compensation mechanism drew on restaurant funds without fixed criteria or any route to pass the risk on, since parity also blocked raising prices.

The decision sits beside the Council's Uber-Dantaxi merger call as a signal that Danish regulators have market structure, network effects and tipping on their enforcement agenda.

In a market tipping toward one platform, standard terms that look bilateral can be found abusive - especially pricing terms that leave the counterparty no way to answer.

The DCC ordered Wolt to stop immediately, refrain from similar conduct with equivalent effects, inform all restaurants on the platform, and document that it has done so. The case now goes to the Danish courts, which will decide any fine; Wolt is expected to challenge the decision, including the finding of dominance. Per Wolt, the price parity clause has not been applied in Denmark since December 4, 2025.