Mathew Heim

Amazon (Seattle)
Head of International Competition Policy

Mathew Heim is a Visiting Fellow at Bruegel focusing on Competition Policy. He also works as an independent consultant advising clients on managing the political, policy or communications angle of complex legal matters, notably in the competition enforcement sphere. Recently Mathew was Vice President at Qualcomm, where for almost a decade he advised the company on competition policy, intellectual property rights, industrial policy and regulation. Prior to his in-house experience, Mathew spent over a decade advising on European political, regulatory and legal matters, notably unilateral or joint conduct cases, merger cases and litigation in sectors such as varied as telecommunications, online advertising, software, audio-visual content, chemicals, ship-building, raw materials and bananas. Mathew is also active at the OECD Competition Committee and is a Non-Governmental Advisor to the International Competition Network. He is also a Committee Member of the EU Law Group of the Honourable Society of Lincoln’s Inn and member of the Editorial Board of the IBA’s Competition Law International. He was awarded degrees from both the universities of Bristol and Exeter before being called to the Bar of England and Wales. He is fluent in English, French, German and Spanish.}}}

Linked authors

Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer (Paris)
University Paris II Panthéon‑Assas
General Court of the European Union (Luxembourg)
Paris School of Economics
French State Council (Paris)
ESSEC Business School (Cergy)
Compass Lexecon (Brussels)
Van Bael & Bellis (Brussels)

Articles

1179 Bulletin

Mathew Heim Extraterritoriality: The effect of remedies on the international antitrust system

1179

The doctrine of “exterritoriality” in competition law is generally understood to define the scope of government authorities or courts to apply their competition laws on legal persons based in another jurisdiction. Such extraterritorial jurisdiction is generally only invoked where it can be shown that there are “direct, substantial, and foreseeable” anticompetitive effects, in what is known as the “qualified effects test.” This doctrine, which finds its roots in the U.S. 1945 Alcoa case, is now largely replicated across most competition jurisdictions in one form or another.

4818 Review

Frédéric Jenny, Damien Neven, Jacques Buhart, David Henry, Thomas Funke, Mathew Heim, Catarina Midões, Nicholas Levy, David R. Little, Henry Mostyn, Ioannis Lianos, Massimo Motta, Martin Peitz, Cristoforo Osti, Almos Papp, Christian Wik, Kristian Hugmark, Julia Vahvaselkä, Antoine Winckler, Thierry Boillot Which competition and industrial policies for the new EU Commission after Siemens/Alstom?

4818

This series of articles presents different points of view about the priorities of the newly established Commission on competition policy in Europe in the aftermath of the decision prohibiting the Siemens/Alstom merger and of the manifesto published by French and German governments. These (...)

Send a message