Contact

Emily Neill

Blackstone Chambers (London)

Barrister

Emily Neill is barrister at Blackstone Chambers. Emily practises in a broad range of European & Competition Law, having focused on this area during her academic career. Emily practices across all of Chambers’ main areas of work. She has experience as Counsel in the High Court, county courts, employment and social security tribunals, Privy Council, Court of Appeal, Court of Justice of the European Union and has appeared in the Supreme Court on multiple occasions. Emily spent June – July 2013 on secondment to the Cabinet of UK Judge Vajda at the Court of Justice of the European Union. She has particular experience in both the telecommunications and postal services sector, with an in-depth knowledge of the regulatory regimes under the Communications Act 2003 and the Postal Services Act 2011. A significant part of Emily’s practice involves highly confidential advisory work in these regulatory areas.

Contact

Articles

727 Bulletin

Emily Neill The UK CAT rules on passing-on defence (Sainsbury ’s Supermarket / Mastercard)

14 July 2016 280

The passing-on “defence” after Sainsbury’s*The passing-on defence – ie. whether the damages suffered by a purchaser of a product which has been the subject of a cartel are reduced if he passes on the overcharge to his own customers – had, as Tristan Jones blogged a few years ago, been the subject of (...)

Emily Neill The High Court of England rules on the relevance of commercial gain for establishing an abuse of dominance on the market for airport to city centre bus route (Arriva The Shires / London Luton Airport Operations)

28 January 2014 147

Abuse of dominance: no commercial gain, no abuse?* Is it necessary for there to be some commercial benefit to be gained by a dominant undertaking from its conduct before that conduct can be condemned as abusive? No, says Mrs Justice Rose in Arriva the Shires Ltd v London Luton Airport (...)

Emily Neill The EU Court of Justice upholds the ruling that adjudication on the merits would be devoid of purpose since the applicant did not have sufficient interest in the matter at the time he brought his challenge to the Commission’s decision (Guillermo Cañas)

20 June 2013 92

Cañas: no sufficient interest in showing anti-competitive rules* Retirement comes too soon for many professional sports players, but for Guillermo “Willy” Cañas, an Argentinean tennis player once ranked world number 8, there was yet more to be lost upon retirement than just the tournament prizes (...)

Emily Neill The England and Wales Court of Appeal dismisses the appeal contesting the validity of Ofcom’s choice of cost model and states that pointing out flaws in the reasoning adopted by a disputed decision is not enough in order to be successful on a merits appeal (Everything Everywhere)

6 March 2013 92

Appeals on the merits: only pick a hole if you can fill it* In his recent blog “Down the rabbit hole,” Tom Richards described the “quasi judicial review within an appeal” contained in s.193(7) Communications Act 2003 as something of a Wonderland. On 6 March 2013 it was the turn of the Court of (...)

Emily Neill The England and Wales Court of Appeal concludes that the respondent acted properly within its powers and in accordance with its duties in rejecting the plaintiff’s notice as not being fair and reasonable (Telefonica O2 / British Telecommunications)

25 July 2012 116

Keeping the CAT in its bag: the 08 Appeal* Ofcom will likely be delighted by the result in the Court of Appeal’s decision in Telefonica O2 UK Limited and others v British Telecommunications PLC [2012] EWCA Civ 1002, in which the Regulator appeared as an interested party. Not only does the (...)