Covington & Burling (Brussels)

Johan Ysewyn

Covington & Burling (Brussels)
Lawyer (Partner & Professor)

Johan Ysewyn is a partner at Covington & Burling in Brussels. He advises on all aspects of EC, international and Belgian antitrust law, including merger control, compliance and cartel and leniency issues. He has acted for both parties and complainants. Johan’s practice has a strong focus on global and European cartel investigations and he has defended companies from a range of sectors. Johan has written and lectured extensively on international cartel and leniency-related issues. He co-authors the loose-leaf European Cartel Digest and lectures on cartel law and economics at the Brussels School of Competition. He has acted for the immunity applicants in the bitumen and marine hose cartels and acted for defendants in alleged cartels in consumer goods, pharmaceuticals and chemicals. He is currently acting in a series of cartel investigations by the European Commission in relation to consumer electronics and price benchmarking in the oil sector. He has also acted for the European Payments Council in the first European Commission investigation into standardisation agreements, notably in the e-payments sector. Over the last four years, he has also been very active in the state aid area advising a number of leading banks and governments. He has notably been involved in the Fortis, KBC, Dexia, Arco, Citadele and Air Baltic state aid cases. Johan speaks regularly at conferences such as GCR, IBC, IBA, Chatham House and industry events and has written for numerous legal publications and is recognised as a leading competition lawyer by Chambers & Partners, Legal 500 and other industry guides. Johan has acted as a non-governmental advisor to the International Competition Network (ICN). He has also been asked to advise the European Competition Network on the review of the ECN leniency policies.

Distinctions

Linked authors

ESSEC Business School (Cergy)
RBB Economics (Brussels)
Clifford Chance (Brussels)
Liedekerke Wolters Waelbroeck Kirkpatrick (Brussels)
Hausfeld (Brussels)
Hausfeld (London)
Compass Lexecon (Düsseldorf)
Covington & Burling (Brussels)

Articles

4576 Bulletin

Johan Ysewyn, Andrea Zulli, Kevin Coates The EU Commission launches a sector inquiry into the consumer-related devices and services that are connected through a network and can be controlled wirelessly (IoT)

231

On July 16, 2020, the European Commission (“Commission”) announced that it has launched an antitrust sector inquiry into "consumer-related products and services that are connected to a network and can be controlled at a distance, for example via a voice assistant or mobile device." Commission (...)

Martin Juhasz, Johan Ysewyn The EU Commission prepares a new competition enforcement tool to extend the Competition Authority’s current enforcement powers and allow for far-reaching intervention in structural competition concerns

119

The European Commission (”Commission”) is preparing the ground for a new competition enforcement tool. This new tool could substantially extend the competition authority’s current enforcement powers and allow for far-reaching intervention where the Commission identifies structural competition (...)

Johan Ysewyn, Geoffrey Kalantari, Sophie Bertin The EU Commission includes recapitalisation measures in the temporary framework for State aid measures to support the economy during the COVID-19 outbreak

34

On 8 May 2020, the European Commission (“Commission”) adopted a second amendment (the “New Amendment”) to the Temporary Framework for State aid measures to support the economy during the COVID-19 outbreak (the “Temporary Framework”) (see our previous post on the Temporary Framework here and on the (...)

Jennifer Boudet, Johan Ysewyn Leniency and competition law: An overview of EU and national case law

3377

More than 20 years after the adoption of the first European Commission Leniency Notice, the detection and sanctioning of cartels remains a key feature of the enforcement agenda of the European Commission (the “Commission”) and – the currently still 28 – European Union (“EU”) national competition authorities (“NCAs” or “CAs”). Leniency programmes are a crucial tool in uncovering cartels, with a large majority of cartel decisions adopted by European competition authorities based on immunity and leniency applications. But for how long?

Johan Ysewyn, Peter D. Camesasca, Louise Freeman The UK Competition Appeal Tribunal refuses a £14 billion class action against a financial service company (Merricks / MasterCard)

29

On Friday, July 21, 2017, the UK’s Competition Appeal Tribunal (the “CAT”) handed down its second class certification decision under the class actions regime introduced by the Consumer Rights Act 2015 (the “Act”). It dismissed the application for two reasons. First, the proposed representative (...)

Johan Ysewyn, Peter D. Camesasca, Louise Freeman The UK Competition Appeal Tribunal hands down its first-class certification for entering into agreements and concerted practices aimed at prohibiting the online advertising of certain models of mobility scooter (Dorothy Gibson / Pride Mobility Products)

26

The UK’s Competition Appeal Tribunal (the “CAT”) has handed down its first class certification judgment in relation to the class actions regime introduced by the Consumer Rights Act 2015 (the “Act”). The result? The hearing has been adjourned, with the proposed representative allowed to file and (...)

Johan Ysewyn The UK Competition Appeal Tribunal hands down its first-class certification judgment on concerted practices in the mobility scooter sector (Dorothy Gibson / Pride Mobility Products)

26

After a wait of nearly 15 months from the introduction of class actions in the UK for antitrust damages claims, the first class certification hearing took place before the UK’s Competition Appeal Tribunal (the “CAT”) between December 12 and 14. Having heard argument, the CAT is considering (...)

Johan Ysewyn, Peter D. Camesasca, Andrea Zulli, Alexander Leitch, Robert D. Wick, Derek Ludwin, Anita F. Stork The EU Court of Justice rules on the expansion of jurisdiction to impose fines based on foreign sales of cartelized components (Innolux)

14

On July 9, 2015, the EU’s top court, the EU Court of Justice (CJEU), rendered its long-awaited ruling in the Innolux - LCD cartel appeal. The Innolux case is effectively the EU counterpart of the U.S. Motorola litigation in that it concerns fundamental issues of antitrust jurisdiction over (...)

Johan Ysewyn, Peter D. Camesasca, Melissa Van Schoorisse, Laura Corbett The Belgian Competition Authority imposes a record fine in the supermarkets cartel (Cartel de la beauté)

11

On 22 June 2015 the Belgian Competition Authority (“BCA”) issued its decision in the supermarkets cartel, fining 18 supermarkets and suppliers of personal care, hygiene and cleaning products for coordinating retail price increases between 2002 and 2007. This occurred in the context of a cartel (...)

Peter D. Camesasca, Johan Ysewyn, Laurie-Anne Grelier, Phillip H. Warren, Michael J. Fanelli, Derek Ludwin The EU Court of Justice confirms that the exchange of sensitive information could constitute a cartel (Dole Food)

20

In an important ruling rendered March 19, 2015 in the Bananas case, the EU’s top court definitively upheld the EU Commission’s expansive view of cartel conduct and held that no “fix” (as in agreement) is needed for the EU to conclude that cartel activities have occurred. It is no secret that the (...)

Johan Ysewyn The EU Court of Justice holds that EU Member States cannot adopt legislation depriving plaintiffs of all rights to access evidence in a cartel file of an antitrust authority (Donau Chemie)

7

The European Union’s Court of Justice (CJEU) has handed a victory to cartel damage claimants. In its 6 June Donau Chemie ruling, the CJEU held that EU Member States cannot adopt legislation that deprives plaintiffs of all rights to access evidence in a cartel file of an antitrust authority. (...)

Johan Ysewyn The EU Court of Justice rules that legal professional privilege does not cover communications between in-house lawyers and other employees at a company (Akzo Novel Chemicals)

8

INTRODUCTION On 14 September 2010, the Court of Justice, the highest court in the European Union (“EU”), ruled that, in the context of EU competition law investigations, legal professional privilege (“LPP”) does not cover communications between in-house lawyers and other employees at a company, (...)

1713 Review

Books

Send a message