Miguel Rato

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan (Brussels)
Lawyer (Partner)

Miguel Rato is a partner in the firm’s Brussels office where his practice focuses on EU competition law. He advises clients on a wide array of contentious and non-contentious EU competition law issues, with a particular focus on unilateral conduct matters, transactions, and IP licensing in high-tech industries. His experience also encompasses EU merger control and State aid investigations. Miguel has been involved in some of the leading competition cases in high-tech industries and at the intersection of IP and competition law, including the European Commission’s five-year Article 102 investigation into Qualcomm (which garnered the Legal Business award for Competition Team of the Year 2010) and the European Commission’s investigation of Microsoft’s conduct regarding the Internet Explorer browser. From May 2004 to November 2005, Miguel worked as a Référendaire (Clerk) at the European General Court (EGC) in Luxembourg. Whilst at the EGC, he dealt with cases pertaining to the fields of EC trade mark, competition, State aid and customs law. Miguel is a lecturer on EU competition law and intellectual property at the Brussels School of Competition in Brussels. He was a visiting lecturer on competition law in the EU and in Spain at the IEB in Madrid from 2011 to 2012.

Auteurs associés

DG COMP (Brussels)
Compass Lexecon (Brussels)
Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan (Brussels)
DG COMP (Brussels)
Compass Lexecon (Brussels)
Qualcomm (San Diego)
Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan (Brussels)
European Commission - Legal Service

Articles

751 Bulletin

Miguel Rato, Stephen Mavroghenis, Trevor Soames The EU Court of Justice rules on whether a retroactive loyalty rebates scheme is liable to have an exclusionary effect (Post Danmark II)

564

The EU Court of Justice has handed down its much-awaited preliminary ruling in Post Danmark II . This ruling marks an ‘evolution’ rather than a ‘revolution’ in the assessment of rebates under Article 102 TFEU. While regrettably unclear in certain passages, some aspects of the Court of Justice’s (...)

Miguel Rato, Trevor Soames The EU Court of Justice rules on the circumstances in which a presumptively dominant SEP holder who has given a FRAND commitment may seek injunctive relief (Huawei / ZTE)

187

The application of competition law to standard essential patents (SEPs) has been the subject of significant debate. The latest instalment was provided by the Court of Justice on 16 July 2015 with its much-anticipated preliminary ruling in Huawei v. ZTE, which concerns the circumstances in which (...)

614 Revue

Envoyer un message