Maurits Dolmans
Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton (London), Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton (Brussels)
Lawyer (Partner)
Maurits J.F.M. Dolmans is a partner at Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton based in the London office. Mr. Dolmans’ practice focuses on EU, UK, and international competition law, as well as EU regulatory, and EU intellectual property law. Mr. Dolmans has extensive experience in the information technology, telecom, media and entertainment, as well as in energy, medical devices, chemicals and manufacturing industries. He appeared in proceedings before the EU Commission and the EU courts, national courts and national competition authorities of several Member States, and ICC and NAI arbitrations. Many of his competition cases involve abuse of dominance, licensing or refusals to license, European standardization, access to networks, mergers, joint ventures and other transactions in the IT, telecom and other areas, intellectual property arbitration and litigation, abuses of dominance and cartels. He has published widely in these areas. Recent public cases involve EU clearance for Google’s acquisition of Motorola, UK OFT clearance for Google’s acquisition of Beatthatquote, successful closure of a range of complaints against IBM for alleged abuse of dominance, representation of Google in a wide range of matters involving alleged abuse of dominance relating to patents, search services, and advertising. Other matters include representation of various complainants in Commission and European Court proceedings against Microsoft concerning the interface between IP and competition (e.g., disclosure of Microsoft interoperability information), unilateral conduct (tying of media player and browser, pricing practices, etc), leading to the successful 2004 EC decision, the rejection of interim measures requested by Microsoft and the rejection of Microsoft’s appeal to the European Court in 2007, as well as the 2009 Microsoft Interoperability Undertaking and the 2009 Microsoft Browser Choice Commitment. Another recent series of highly visible cases concerns the interaction between international standardization and antitrust and IP, including licensing practices and abuse of dominance. Mr. Dolmans is distinguished by Chambers "The World’s Leading Lawyers" and other publications as a leading lawyer in the areas of Competition/Antitrust and Communications. Mr. Dolmans joined the firm in 1985 and became a partner in 1994. He received an LL.M. degree from Columbia University in 1985 and a Master of Laws from the Rijks Universiteit Leiden in The Netherlands in 1984. Mr. Dolmans is a member of the Bars in New York, Rotterdam and Brussels (E-list). His native language is Dutch, and he is fluent in English and French. He also has a working knowledge of German.
Distinctions
Nominee, 2019 Antitrust Writing Awards : Business, Intellectual Property
Nominee, 2019 Antitrust Writing Awards : Business, Concerted Practices
Winner, 2018 Antitrust Writing Awards : Business, General Antitrust
Nominee, 2016 Antitrust Writing Awards : Academic, Concerted Practices
Winner, 2015 Antitrust Writing Awards : Business, Intellectual Property
Nominee, 2014 Antitrust Writing Awards : Academic, Dominance
Nominee, 2013 Antitrust Writing Awards : Academic, General Antitrust
Nominee, 2012 Antitrust Writing Awards : Business, Anticompetitive Practices
Auteurs associés
Jérôme Gstalter
General Court of the European Union (Luxembourg)
Machiel Bolhuis
Ziggo (Amsterdam)
Ute Decker
Partridge Consulting
Jean-Yves Art
Microsoft (Brussels)
Per Hellstrom
Apple (Brussels)
Mikko Välimäki
Aalto University
Thomas Kramler
DG COMP (Brussels)
Friedrich Wenzel Bulst
DG COMP (Brussels)
2964 | Conférences
Articles
5147 Bulletin
589
On 18 July 2019, the European Commission (“EC”) fined Qualcomm for abusing its market dominance by selling 3G baseband chipsets below cost, to force its competitor Icera out of the market. The EC found that Qualcomm sold three of its UMTS (a 3G standard) chipsets at predatory levels between (...)
134
In 2015, the EU Interchange Fee Regulation (the “IFR”) introduced price caps on the interchange fees paid between banks for processing credit and debit card payments. These fee caps attempt to address concerns identified in a series of antitrust investigations into Visa and Mastercard through (...)
109
On December 21, 2017, the District Court for the Central District of California issued TCL v. Ericsson, resolving a long-standing dispute between the parties concerning worldwide licenses to 2G, 3G, and 4G standard essential patents (SEPs) owned by Ericsson. The court determined that none of (...)
268
On October 17, 2017, the UK Government published legislative proposals that would give it greater powers to intervene in mergers that raise national security considerations or involve national infrastructure. In the short-term, any transaction involving a party active in the manufacture or (...)
663
(“CJEU”) set aside General Court’s 2014 Intel judgment, upholding a European Commission (the “Commission”) decision fining Intel €1.06 billion for abuse of dominance through exclusivity rebates . The CJEU held that the General Court had erred in failing to examine all of Intel’s arguments calling (...)
888
On May 18, 2017, the European Commission (the “Commission”) fined Facebook €110 million for providing incorrect or misleading information during its 2014 investigation of its acquisition of WhatsApp The magnitude of the fine dwarfs the few penalties the Commission has imposed in the past for (...)
435
In September 2016, the Competition and Markets Authority (“CMA”) launched a Market Study into digital comparison tools (“DCTs”). On March 28, 2017, the CMA published an update on the Market Study setting out its preliminary findings and areas of focus for the second part of the Market Study. The (...)
180
The Damages Directive seeks to promote private enforcement of EU competition law before national courts across the European Union (the “EU”). The UK Regulations implementing the Directive were laid before Parliament on 20 December 2016 but will not come into force until after they have (...)
208
On March 2, 2015, China’s National Development and Reform Commission (“NDRC”), the agency responsible for investigating price-related violations of China’s Anti-Monopoly Law (the “AML”), published a decision (the “NDRC Decision”) regarding its investigation into alleged anticompetitive conduct by (...)
542
I. Introduction This e-Competitions Special Issue collects articles on competition law developments relating to the Internet at national and EU levels, as authorities seek to apply antitrust principles to the new world of online services. The changes brought about by the Internet cut across (...)
729
I. Introduction The last decade has seen Internet-based “disruptive innovation” in many sectors of the economy, not least communications, media, advertising and retail. This unprecedented development has brought about changes that would have been unimaginable until very recently : Websites, (...)
402
This article has been selected for the business category, anti-competitive practices section of the 2012 Antitrust Writing Awards. Click here to learn more about the Antitrust Writing Awards. On January 14, 2011, the European Commission (the “Commission”) published new Guidelines on the (...)
7682 Revue
1855
Le mot “équité”, qui revient fréquemment dans les discussions politiques, connaît une résurgence dans les débats publics sur le droit de la concurrence de l’UE. “Equité”, cependant, est un concept moral imprécis et subjectif. Cela signifie des choses différentes à des moments différents, dans des pays (...)
475
Nous bénéficions des avantages de la révolution des technologies qui a eu lieu au cours des dernières décennies – des recherches en ligne gratuites, des médias sociaux gratuits, des logiciels gratuits pour les smartphones et une innovation constante. En même temps, l’environnement en ligne est de plus (...)
5352
Contributors to this thematic study were asked to answer a question that seems simple on the surface : Do open standards promote competition ? However, this question raises a tricky and preliminary problem : how to define an “open standard” ? Written by eminent specialists, this set of articles (...)
Livres
2013 Competition Case Law Digest - A Synthesis of EU and National Leading Cases
The purpose of this book is to compare and contrast EU competition case law with European Members States competition case law, and Members States competition case law with each other. To the best (...)
Date
12 décembre 2012
