Review of Procedural Developments

Review of Procedural Developments

0:00
0%
0:00
|
0:00
https://cdn.streamly.video/Advanced_EU_Comp_Thumbnail_1902x953_986ba06f9d.png
PREVIEW
Purchase access to watch the full video
Daniel SeverinssonDaniel SeverinssonJudge at Patent and Market Court / Stockholm District Court

Daniel Severinsson is a judge with the specialized Patent and Market Court which handle all civil and administrative competition law cases in the first instance in Sweden. He joined the court when it was established in 2016 and has since been responsible for competition law matters. Judge Severinsson regularly teaches competition law both in house at the Patent and Market Court and internationally for various organizations such as the European Judicial Training Network. He is a member of the Executive Committee of The Association of European Competition Law Judges and is appointed legal expert in the Swedish government inquiry New competition tools for well-functioning markets.

Judge Severinsson also has several years of previous experience as legal counsel with the Swedish Competition Authority. He obtained his Master of Laws degree at the Stockholm University in 2002.

Ief DaemsIef DaemsChair at In-house Competition Lawyers Association

Ief Daems is Chair of the In-house Competition Lawyers Association (ICLA). ICLA is an informal association of in-house competition lawyers with more than 500 members across the globe. The Association does not represent companies but is made up of individuals who are in-house experts in competition law. Ief is also Associate General Counsel, Legal Director Competition Law for Cisco. He previously worked as Senior Legal Counsel at an Asian global conglomerate, and as competition lawyer at the Brussels offices of Howrey and Shearman & Sterling. Ief holds a MSc in International and European Politics from the University of Edinburgh, and a Master of Law from the University of Leuven.

Pascal BerghePascal BergheMember of the Legal Service (Competition Team) at European Commission

Pascal Berghe is a Member of the Commission’s Legal Service (Competition Team). In his current position, Mr. Berghe is advising the Commission in connection to competition proceedings (cartels, abuses of dominant position and merger control) and has acted on behalf of the Commission before the EU Courts in competition law related cases, both in direct actions and preliminary reference cases. Prior to joining the Commission in 2019, Mr. Berghe practised for close to ten years in the Brussels office of international law firms, first with Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton LLP and then with White & Case LLP, specialising in all aspects of EU competition law. He also served as a référendaire to Judge Forrester KC at the General Court of the European Union. In terms of academic background, Mr. Berghe graduated from the University of Liège and he holds an LL.M. in European Law from the College of Europe as well as an LL.M. in Trade Regulation from New York University School of Law. He was a member of the editorial board of the Journal of European Competition Law & Practice for several years and has published a number of articles in the field of EU competition law.

Marie ÖstmanMarie ÖstmanChief Legal Officer at Swedish Competition Authority

Chief Legal Officer and Head of Litigation Unit at the Swedish Competition Authority. Prior to re-joining the Competition Authority in 2018, where she earlier held a position as legal counsel, she worked as a lawyer specialised in EU and Swedish competition law at a major law firm in Stockholm and Brussels. Marie has also served at the Swedish Ministry of Enterprise and Innovation advising on matters relating to competition and state aid. From her time at the law firm, she is a co-author of previous editions of a handbook in Swedish competition law. She has a Master of Laws degree from the University of Gothenburg (199😎.

Get access to this content as part of Competition Law Library
Description
  • Regulation 1/2003
  • Key takeaways from Qualcomm vs European Commission
  • The importance of correct note taking and implications for whistle-blowers
  • Evidence and standards of proof after Intermarché Casino Achats v Commission (Case C-693/20 P): what should the authorities do?
0
Your cart