Christoph works for Deutsche Bahn as a senior legal counsel. He has previous experience advising national and international companies on all aspects of German and European antitrust law. He focused on the coordination of multinational merger transactions, on EU and German merger control proceedings as well as the representation of corporate clients in antitrust investigations by the German Federal Cartel Office and the European Commission.
310
In its judgment of 17 October 2017, the Federal Court of Justice (Bundesgerichtshof - “BGH” or the “Court”) quashed a decision taken by the Celle Higher Regional Court (Oberlandesgericht Celle – “OLG Celle”) in April 2016 which had ruled that minimum resale pricing did not result in an appreciable (...)
408
In its judgement of 7 April 2016, the Celle Higher Regional Court (“the Court”) found that resale price maintenance (“RPM”) does not per se result in an appreciable restriction of competition. The Court held that the setting of a minimum resale price in the framework of a promotion offered to (...)
318
In its judgement of 18 November 2015, the Düsseldorf Higher Regional Court (“the Court”) quashed a decision of the Federal Cartel Office (“FCO”) which stated that German food retailer EDEKA abused its dominant position by requesting preferential purchase conditions and bonus payments from sparkling (...)
510
In June 2015, the German Federal Cartel Office (“FCO”) has concluded most of its long going proceedings against manufacturers and retailers in the food sector for illegally fixing the retail prices of branded products. The FCO imposed total fines of EUR 151.6million on both manufacturers and (...)
117
In its judgement of 18 November 2014, the Federal Court of Justice (hereafter referred to as the “Court”) allowed the plaintiff’s appeal on points of law against the decision of the Higher Regional Court of Munich of 9 February 2012. The Court held that, subject to certain conditions, a parent (...)
129
In its decision of 18 February 2014, the Federal Court of Justice (the “Court”) considered the right to refuse testimony to apply to any information which became known to a lawyer in the course of two telephone calls he made for the purpose of the acquisition of a new client. As a consequence, (...)
19 avenue Jean Aicard
75011 Paris, France
106 West 32nd Street, Suite 149
New York, NY, 10001, USA
563 Chiswick High Road
W4 3AY London, UK