Elvira Aliende Rodriguez
Shearman & Sterling (Brussels)
Partner
Elvira Aliende Rodriguez is a partner in the Antitrust practice. She focuses on Spanish and EU competition law. Elvira advises clients across a range of sectors, including air transport, chemicals, telecommunications, energy, pharmaceuticals, steel, hotel accommodation, textiles and financial services. She has extensive experience in advising clients on Article 101 (restrictive agreements) and the equivalent provisions under Spanish law. She has also participated in State aid procedures and in Article 102 (abuse of dominance) cases before the EU competition authorities. She has in-depth knowledge of working before the European Commission and the European Courts.
Distinctions
Nominee, 2021 Antitrust Writing Awards : Business, Private Enforcement
Nominee, 2020 Antitrust Writing Awards : Business, Procedure
Nominee, 2018 Antitrust Writing Awards : Business, Concerted Practices
Nominee, 2015 Antitrust Writing Awards : Business, Private Enforcement
AWA 2021 logo small Nominated
nom-2018
nom-2018
nom-2015
Auteurs associés
Reena Agrawal Sahni
Shearman & Sterling (New York)
Dr. Sultan Almasoud
Shearman & Sterling
Alicia Bello
Shearman & Sterling (Washington)
Hundt Brendan
Shearman & Sterling
Christopher Bright
Shearman & Sterling (London)
2830 | Conférences
Articles
4162 Bulletin
446
On 18 May 2022the European General Court rejected Canon’s appeal against a €28 million fine imposed by the European Commission in 2019 for its breach of EU gun-jumping rules, just a few months after a similar judgment therefore vindicating the Commission’s aggressive stance on such breaches. (...)
293
On 26 January 2022 the General Court (GC) issued its latest judgment in the Intel case, faulting fundamental aspects of the Commission’s original decision almost 13 years prior. The judgment’s findings are promising for pending cases appealing similar issues, including the application of the “as (...)
174
English Court of Appeal Clarifies Threshold for Raising ‘Off-Setting’ Defences in Competition and Other Breach of Duty Claims Introduction and Summary The recent decision of the English Court of Appeal in NTN Corporation v. Stellantis concerned an appeal against a successful application to (...)
304
The U.K. Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) last week certified the well-publicized Mastercard class action litigation. In our previous article (See Chris Collins, Elvira Aliende Rodriguez, Jonathan Swil, Ozlem Fidanboylu, The UK Supreme Court gives guidance on collective proceedings in (...)
153
The Supreme Court has handed down its judgment in the case which concerned the test for the certification of collective proceedings within the context of a follow-on damages claim in the Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT). The Supreme Court has dismissed Mastercard’s appeal ; the case will now (...)
173
On 11 November 2020, the U.K. Government announced long-awaited and extensive reforms to the U.K. foreign investment regime. The reforms proposed are more significant than anticipated and include a mandatory notification regime alongside broader “call-in” powers for the Secretary of State. The (...)
308
Holds Findings Made by European Courts Cannot Be Relied on in Different Context in Other Proceedings On November 6, 2020 the U.K. Supreme Court handed down a judgment relating to the Servier U.K. competition damages litigation, in which it made key observations on when a judicial decision of (...)
81
On September 24, 2020 the European Commission (EC) launched proposals for a new EU-wide regime to regulate crypto-assets and distributed ledger technology (DLT) in the financial sector through a Digital Finance Package. Key issues relevant to companies and stakeholders in digital finance are (...)
143
In her first speech upon being reappointed as Competition Commissioner, Commissioner Vestager announced that a review would be undertaken of the Commission’s Market Definition Notice (the “Notice”) ; the consultation on that review closed Friday, October 9th. The Notice is an important document in (...)
28
Introduction The U.K. Supreme Court has handed victory to a group of British retailers (the “respondents”) in a long-running dispute with Mastercard and Visa Europe (the “appellants”) finding that the default “multilateral interchange fees” (MIFs) set by Mastercard and Visa and charged by (...)
44
Under the leadership of Margrethe Vestager, the European Commission has taken an increasing interventionist stand across all areas of antitrust enforcement, in particular in merger control. The EU’s General Court dealt that aggressive agenda a massive blow by annulling the first of her many (...)
182
Although the EU’s introduction of a Temporary Framework has enabled governments to offer extensive State-backed loans, the airline industry needs more than just credit—it will need equity. However, State aid to the aviation industry is strictly regulated by the European Commission (the (...)
374
How will European Competition Enforcers Respond ? The COVID-19 pandemic presents an unprecedented challenge to the economy and competition enforcement is no exception. Authorities at EU and national level may need to consider novel solutions to respond to rapidly evolving problems and to (...)
547
This article has been nominated for the 2020 Antitrust Writing Awards. Click here to learn more about the Antitrust Writing Awards. On 24 September 2019, the EU General Court (GC) handed down its judgment in HSBC v. Commission. Consistent with recent precedent, the GC reaffirmed the European (...)
492
On 4 October 2017, the High Court gave a judgment on a preliminary issue significantly restricting the temporal scope of the claimants’ claims in four air cargo cartel damages actions. This judgment is the last in a series of adverse judgments for the claimants in these proceedings. Background (...)
420
This article has been nominated for the 2015 Antitrust Writing Awards. Click here to learn more about the Antitrust Writing Awards. Today, the EU considers that those affected by competition law infringement in some Member States are not able to effectively exercise their right to (...)
