White & Case (Brussels)

James Killick

White & Case (Brussels)
Lawyer (Partner)

James is a litigator whose practice covers competition, pharmaceuticals, and international trade. He advises leading industry players in a broad range of business sectors, from information technology and chemicals to airlines and paper. Recognized as one of the leading lawyers in his field by The International Who’s Who of Competition Lawyers & Economists 2019, James uses his extensive experience and formidable grasp of EU laws and procedures to help clients navigate complex strategic issues. James has been involved in pleading numerous high-profile cases in the European Courts, including: Servier (patent settlements), ’SAS v Commission’ (Air Cargo), ’Rambus’ (standard setting), Intel, (discounts), ’Microsoft v Commission’ (compulsory licensing; treatment of trade secrets), ’Hanner’ (finding the Swedish retail monopoly on pharmaceuticals illegal), ’Forum 187 v Commission’ (fiscal state aids), ’Pfizer v Council’ (precautionary principle), ’IMS Health’ (compulsory licensing), ’Nintendo v Commission’ (parallel trade), ’Servier v Commission’ (banning of pharmaceuticals), ’Cheil Jedang v Commission’ (fining policy) and ’Du Pont v Commission’ (anti-dumping, GSP). The competition law journal Global Competition Review named the Air Cargo case, in which James represented SAS, as its Matter of the Year for 2016. In the competition field, James regularly advises companies under investigation by the Commission, notably in areas such as pharmaceuticals and standard setting, where IP and competition law overlap. He also advises merging parties under the EU Merger Regulation, and has successfully defended several major cartel cases. He also acts for third-party complainants in mergers and classic antitrust cases and has an extensive advisory practice. James has initiated several major anti-dumping and anti-subsidy actions for European industries, notably in relation to China and India. He also provides advice on export control compliance with the EU dual-use regulation and national military control regulations. As leader of the firm’s EU sanctions team, James advises clients throughout the world on EU sanctions and export control issues and keeps a very close watch on the frequent changes to EU sanctions regimes, especially those on Iran and Ukraine. (e.g., Iran, Syria, Libya, Belarus, Burma/Myanmar and the Ukraine crisis).

Distinctions

Linked authors

White & Case (Brussels)
White & Case (Washington)
White & Case (New York)
White & Case (Washington)
White & Case (New York)

Videos

James Killick (White & Case)
James Killick 3 October 2019 London

Articles

16169 Bulletin

Peter Citron, Tilman Kuhn, Assimakis Komninos, James Killick, Jérémie Jourdan The EU Court of Justice dismisses the appeals of several manufacturers of medicines involved in an agreement seeking to delay the marketing of the generic antidepressant citalopram (Lundbeck)

616

On 25 March 2021, the European Court of Justice ("ECJ") dismissed all the appeals against the European Commission’s decision to fine Lundbeck and several other companies for entering into anti-competitive patent settlement agreements. The judgments largely repeat the position taken by the ECJ (...)

James Killick, Assimakis Komninos, Aqeel Kadri The UK Court of Appeal upholds the Competition Appeal Tribunal’s quashing of the Competition Authority’s decision against pharmaceutical undertakings who had abused their dominant position by pricing their epilepsy drug unfairly (Pfizer / Flynn Pharma)

208

On 10 March 2020 the Court of Appeal upheld the Competition Appeal Tribunal’s (CAT) quashing of the Competition and Markets Authority’s (CMA) decision that Pfizer and Flynn Pharma (Flynn) had abused their dominant positions in the market by pricing their epilepsy drug unfairly. Among other (...)

James Killick, Assimakis Komninos, Strati Sakellariou-Witt The UK Competition Authority closes its investigation into an allegedly abusive discount scheme in the pharmaceutical sector (Remicade)

532

This article has been nominated for the 2020 Antitrust Writing Awards. Click here to learn more about the Antitrust Writing Awards. The CMA Remicade decision: discount schemes and abuse of dominance – effects matter!* Summary On 14 March 2019, the UK Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) (...)

Assimakis Komninos, James Killick The EU Court of Justice dismisses the Commission’s appeal against the annulment of its decision to prohibit a merger in the parcel delivery market (UPS / TNT)

586

This article has been nominated for the 2020 Antitrust Writing Awards. Click here to learn more about the Antitrust Writing Awards. EU Court confirms the need for transparency and full disclosure of economic analyses in EU merger cases (UPS/TNT)* On 16 January 2019, the Court of Justice of (...)

Assimakis Komninos, James Killick The UK Competition Appeal Tribunal announces its provisional judgment in an appeal against the Competition Authority’s infringement decision in an excessive price case (Pfizer / Flynn)

512

I. Introduction In the last couple of years, there has been a trend for antitrust watchdogs around the world to investigate excessive pricing, especially in the pharmaceutical sector. Last year, the European Commission opened its first investigation into excessive pricing in the pharmaceutical (...)

Assimakis Komninos, Jacquelyn MacLennan, James Killick, Jan Jeram, Jérémie Jourdan, Strati Sakellariou-Witt The EU Court of Justice endorses an effects-based assessment of rebates (Intel)

731

This article has been nominated for the 2018 Antitrust Writing Awards. Click here to learn more about the Antitrust Writing Awards. On 6 September 2017, the Court of Justice of the European Union ("CJEU" or "Court") essentially held in Intel that the European Commission ("Commission") cannot (...)

Axel P. Schulz, James Killick, Jérémie Jourdan, Mark D. Powell The EU Court of Justice annuls a decision of the Commission requesting information on the ground that the decision did not sufficiently explain why the information requested was necessary (Italmobiliare, Schwenk Zement, HeidelbergCement and Buzzi Unicem)

883

Introduction On 10 March 2016, the European Court of Justice issued a landmark ruling annulling European Commission decisions requesting information from cement manufacturers, on the ground that the decisions did not sufficiently explain why the information requested was necessary . This (...)

Daniel Hoppe-Jänisch, James Killick, Katarzyna Czapracka The EU Court of Justice sets out specific requirements with which an SEP holder needs to comply to be able to seek an injunction without abusing its dominant position (Huawei / ZTE)

437

Standards lie at the heart of the digital economy – without standards, we would not have smartphones, tablets and other key parts of modern life. Europe’s highest court recently delivered a judgment in Huawei v. ZTE explaining when EU competition law will prevent holders of patents that are (...)

Assimakis Komninos, Ian Forrester, James Killick The EU Court of Justice holds that parent companies may be fined for repeated infringements even without being an addressee of the earlier decisions (Versalis)

792

On 5 March 2015, the European Court of Justice (CoJ) handed down its judgment in Versalis , concerning the increasing of fines for antitrust infringements where a company is found to be a repeat offender. The judgment raises important questions about the respect for the rights of defence in EU (...)

James Killick, Katarzyna Czapracka The Advocate General Wathelet states that before seeking an injunction, a standard-essential patent holder must inform an infringer that the latter needs a license (Huawei / ZTE)

268

Summary The Advocate General’s advisory Opinion in the Huawei v. ZTE FRAND Case (C-170/13) would, if followed by the full European Court of Justice (ECJ), usher in a significant shift in the playing field in German litigation on Standard essential patents (SEPs). Germany has been known as a (...)

James Killick, Jérémie Jourdan The EU Court of Justice quashes the General Court judgment for failing to correctly apply the notion of restriction by object (Groupement des Cartes Bancaires)

1429

Introduction On 11 September 2014, the Court of Justice (ECJ) rendered its judgment in the Cartes Bancaires case . The ECJ quashed the General Court (GC) judgment for failing to correctly apply the notion of restriction by object. The Cartes Bancaires contains two key messages: first, the (...)

James Killick, Katarzyna Czapracka Intellectual Property & Antitrust: A synthesis of EU and national case law

703

The interaction between competition rules and intellectual property ("IP") rights has long been among the most interesting, controversial and widely discussed issues in competition law. At a first glance, the objectives of IP law and competition rules might seem to be at odds with each other. On the one hand, competition rules prohibit conduct that restricts competition and thereby leads to lower output and higher prices. On the other, IP law creates exclusive rights that limit access to information, technologies and other intangible assets.

James Killick, Mark D. Powell The EU General Court partially annuls the Commission’s decision and reduces fines in a cartel case concerning the Dutch beer market (Netherlands Beer)

513

By its decision of 18 April 2007, the Commission imposed fines totalling approximately EUR 270 million on several Dutch brewers, including Heineken NV and its subsidiary Heineken Nederland BV, and Bavaria NV, for their participation in a cartel on the Dutch beer market between 27 February 1996 (...)

James Killick, Mark D. Powell The EU General Court holds for the first time that the Commission erred in relying on the presumption that a parent company is liable for the anticompetitive conduct of its wholly-owned subsidiary (Hydrogen Peroxide)

471

By its decision of 3 May 2006, the Commission imposed fines totalling over EUR 388 million on a number of companies for their participation in a cartel on the market for hydrogen peroxide and sodium perborate (bleaching agents) between 31 January 1994 and 31 December 2000. Among the companies (...)

James Killick, Mark D. Powell The EU General Court partially annuls the Commission’s decision and reduces fines in a cartel case concerning the international removal services market in Belgium (Gosselin / Verhuizingen Coppens)

442

By its decision of 11 March 2008, the Commission imposed fines totalling over EUR 32 million on ten companies for their participation in a cartel on the international removal services market in Belgium between October 1984 and September 2003. In particular, the Commission imposed fines of EUR (...)

James Killick The EU Commission condemns leading US software company for abuse of a dominant position in the market for client PC operating systems, ordering to grant compulsory license to competitor (Microsoft / Sun Microsystems)

616

This article analyses the three major recent cases dealing with the boundary between EC competition law and intellectual property rights: the Commission’s interim measures decision in the IMS case, the European Court of Justice’s later judgment in IMS and, finally, the Commission’s decision in the (...)

James Killick, Mark D. Powell The EU CFI overturns the EU Commission’s decision to block a merger in the packaging equipment sector addressing the issues of conglomerate effects and leveraging (Tetra Laval / Sidel)

380

For the third time this year, and the second time this week, the European Court of First Instance ("CFI") has overturned a decision of the EC Commission to block a merger. Once again, the CFI criticized the Commission’s factual findings and its analysis. Within hours of the judgment, (...)

James Killick The EU Court of Justice overturns the EU Commission decision’s to block a merger between two UK tour operators addressing the issue of collective dominance (Airtours / First Choice)

683

In a critical decision, the European Court of First Instance (“CFI”) reversed the decision of the EC Commission, which had blocked AirTours’ acquisition of First Choice, a rival UK tour operator, under Article 2(3) of the EC Merger Control Regulation on the basis that it would have created a (...)

James Killick The EU Commission imposes interim measures on the world leader in data collection on pharmaceutical sales and prescriptions considering that its refusal to grant license constitutes an abuse of dominance (IMS Health)

400

This article analyses the three major recent cases dealing with the boundary between EC competition law and intellectual property rights: the Commission’s interim measures decision in the IMS case, the European Court of Justice’s later judgment in IMS and, finally, the Commission’s decision in the (...)

18561 Review

James Killick, Jorge Padilla, Josef Drexl Standard setting organizations and processes: Challenges and opportunities for competition and innovation (New Frontiers of Antitrust, 15 June 2015, Paris)

833

In this roundtable, speakers discuss the challenges and opportunities that the standard setting organizations and processes represent for competition and innovation. First, Josef Drexl’s introductory remarks focus on defining the scope of the roundtable. In the second contribution, Jorge Padilla (...)

Assimakis Komninos, Florence Ninane, Francesco Rosati, Geoffrey D. Oliver, Hendrik Bourgeois, Ioannis Lianos, James Killick, Johanne Peyre, Niamh McCarthy, Philippe Choné The EU guidance on exclusionary abuses: A step forward or a missed opportunity?

6845

What are the consequences for business of the Commission’s Communication on Article 82 of the Treaty? Does it make the Commission’s action more predictable? Does the use of a wide range of economic criteria reduce the risk that pro-competitive practices by dominant companies will be considered (...)

Books

Send a message