Isabel Oest is a Counsel with Commeo LLP, Frankfurt, since January 2015. She joined the firm in September 2010. She has been working with Baker & McKenzie from 2008-2010. Isabel was admitted to the German bar in 2008. She holds a Master of Laws (LL.M.) from the University of New South Wales, Sydney. She studied law at the universities of Trier, Cologne and at the University of East London and served during her legal training as a stagi-aire at DG Competition in Brussels. Isabel advises on all aspects of German and European antitrust law, with an emphasis on merger control and cartel proceedings before the German Federal Cartel Office and the European Commission as well as antitrust related actions for damages.
196
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, (...)
257
In its decision of 26 November 2013 , the Higher Regional Court of Hamm (“the Court”) had to decide whether a criminal investigation file including a leniency application submitted by a cartelist and parts of the confidential version of the European Commission’s fining decision could be (...)
268
The Higher Regional Court of Naumburg (“the Court”) deals in its decision of 18 July 2013 inter alia with the question whether post-contractual non-compete obligations are still in compliance with antitrust rules in case their duration exceeds five years. The Court came to the conclusion that (...)
188
In its decision of 26 February 2013, which was published on 10 April 2013, the German Federal Court of Justice (“FCJ”) inter alia had to decide on the constitutionality of the key provi-sion on the fining of cartel law violations. The FCJ not only confirmed the constitutionality of this fining (...)
145
According to Sec. 81 (6) of the German Act against Restraints of Competition ("ARC") interests are payable on fines imposed on legal persons and associations of persons in an administrative order of the German Federal Cartel Office ("FCO").In its decision of May 2011 the Higher Regional Court (...)
144
The German Federal Court of Justice (the “Court”) has ruled in its decision of 25 July 2012 that the organiser of a public tender can violate Sec. 298 (1) of the German Criminal Code (Strafgesetzbuch - “StGB”) by organizing together with participating bidders an offer which is based on an (...)
413
Under certain conditions documents in the possession of companies are excluded from seizure during a dawn raid by the European Commission or the national competition authorities. These conditions under which the principle of legal privilege applies are not harmonized within the EU and differ (...)
356
In its decision of 4 May 2012 the Regional Court of Mannheim (in the following "Regional Court") had to assess whether the claimant could rely its claim on a clause on which the claimant had agreed with the contractor in the context of procurement proceedings and which fixed the amount of (...)
527
The Local Court in Bonn (Amtsgericht) decided on 18 January 2012 that no access will be granted to documents voluntarily submitted by a leniency applicant. According to the Local Court the threat to the effective detection and prosecution of competition law infringements justified in the (...)
155
In its decision of 10 August 2011, the German Federal Court of Justice ("FCJ") held that a full legal successor (‘Gesamtrechtsnachfolger’) should only be liable for an infringement of competition law committed by the organ of its legal predecessor if from an economic perspective both entities (...)
