Source: https://www.blackstonechambers.com/barristers/brian-kennelly-qc/
Timestamp: 2019-04-25 02:55:25+00:00

Document:
Brian specialises in competition & EU, commercial, public and regulatory law, sanctions law and telecommunications law. He is recognised by the legal directories as a leading barrister in these areas. He also practices from the Law Library in Dublin. He appears regularly in the Court of Justice of the EU and the General Court, the Supreme Court, Court of Appeal and the Commercial Court, the Competition Appeal Tribunal and the Court of Arbitration for Sport. He has appeared in competition, regulatory and commercial cases in Hong Kong, the Cayman Islands and the Virgin Islands.
Brian has acted in over 60 cases before the CJEU and General Court in a broad range of competition, regulatory and sanctions matters. He is a leading advocate in private competition damages actions, including those concerning Trucks, USD Libor, Ro-Ro Shipping, Foreign Exchange, Wire harnesses, Interchange, EURIBOR, Air Cargo, CRT, Copper Fittings, Industrial Bags, Paraffin Wax, Car Glass, Marine Hose and Vitamins. He has appeared in many of the leading regulatory public law cases of recent years in the Admin Court and the CAT including BASCA, Gibraltar Betting and BAT (tobacco plain packs). In the area of sanctions, Brian has acted for over 40 designated persons and entities and advised Governments, banks and corporates on compliance issues. He is also a specialist telecommunications and media lawyer.
Brian was named Competition Junior of the Year at the Chambers UK Awards 2015 and is ranked in Chambers Global in Competition/EU.
Prior to taking silk, Brian was on the Attorney General's 'A' Panel of Counsel to the Crown.
In 2017 Brian was appointed as Specialist Adviser to the House of Commons Treasury Select Committee to advise on Brexit issues.
Brian is recognised as a leading silk in the latest editions of both the leading legal directories, Chambers UK 2019 and Legal 500 2018, for his expertise in admin and public, banking and finance, competition, European law, media and entertainment, sanctions and telecommunications.
Brian is a leading expert in competition litigation, in challenges to infringement decisions and private damages actions. He has acted for the European Commission, the CMA and private litigants. Brian has appeared in many of the major EU and domestic competition cases in recent years: in the EU courts; Ranbaxy (Lundbeck – citalopram), Deutsche Bahn, Schenker (Freight forwarding cartel), Sanitec/Keramag and Masco (bathroom fittings cartel); Ryanair/ATT (State aid); in the domestic courts: Foreign Exchange, Visa Interchange, Wire Harnesses, EURIBOR, Air Cargo, CRT, Copper Fittings, Industrial Bags, Paraffin Wax, Car Glass, Marine Hose, Tobacco and Vitamins (private damages actions) and Ryanair/Aer Lingus, IRI/Aztec, Universal/EMI (mergers). Brian appeared in the leading cases of Sainsbury's v Visa (restriction), iiyama (territoriality), WH Newson (contribution) and Provimi (jurisdiction).
Brian is acting for Daimler in this major Commercial Court damages action arising from the global Ro-Ro Shipping cartel.
Brian is acting for Scania in this investigation and significant litigation in the Competition Appeal Tribunal.
Brian is acting for the Bank in this multi-billion dollar damages claim arising out of the alleged USD LIBOR cartel. Brian acted for the Bank in its strike out application on limitation grounds in the Commercial Court (pending, 2019).
Brian is acting for the defendant in this major Commercial Court action arising from the European Commission's finding of a cartel in the global market for cathode ray tubes.
Brian is acting for UBS in the context of the Commission investigation under Art 101 TFEU and in the domestic litigation in the Commercial Court arising from the alleged anti-competitive conduct concerning FX spot trading.
Brian acted for the defendant in this arbitration before the German Institute of Arbitration arising from the European Commission's decision finding a cartel in the market for the supply of wire harnesses to vehicle manufacturers.
Brian successfully defended the Commission in appeals to the General Court by freight forwarders challenging findings of global price fixing and fines totalling €169 million.
Brian is acting for the generic pharmaceutical manufacturer in this “pay for delay” case. Brian is challenging the Commission’s finding that a settlement agreement between the original and generic manufacturer in patent infringement proceedings breached Art 101 TFEU. The appeal is currently pending before the CJEU.
Acted for the defendants in this major Commercial Court claim for damages arising out alleged anti-competitive behavior (value in excess of £1bn).
Brian acted for a defendant airline, accused of participating in a worldwide air freight cartel. This judgment addressed many significant issues in damages litigation, such as the scope of Pergan rights and third party access to the file.
Brian is acting for Visa Inc in this stand-alone damages claim alleging that interchange fees breached EU, English and Irish competition law. The claimants claim in excess of £1bn. Brian has also advised in relation to the Commission’s inter-regional MIF investigation. Brian is also acting for Visa in its appeal before the UK Supreme Court (2019).
Brian acted for RBS in its defence of a misrepresentation claim based on rates alleged fixed by reference to the EURIBOR infringement, in which RBS admitted liability and paid a €131m penalty.
Brian acted for LG in successfully striking out on jurisdiction grounds claims worth in excess of €600m relying on the EU Cathode Ray Tubes cartel decision:  5 CMLR 15.
Brian acted for a defendant in this major damages claim arising out the EU’s copper fittings cartel decision. It has given rise to an important judgment on contribution by co-cartelists following settlement by one of them.
Brian is acting for the applicant in this challenge in the General Court against the European Commission’s refusal to allow the merger between Three and O2.
Brian appeared for the Commission in appeals to the General Court, successfully resisting a challenge by bathroom fittings manufacturers to findings of global price fixing and fines totalling €622 million.
Brian appeared for the Commission in successfully resisting an appeal to the General Court and the CJEU by a parent of companies found to have engaged in a global cartel. This is a leading judgment on parental liability in cartel cases.
Brian acted for the defendant in this claim for damages arising from the Industrial Bags cartel decision of the EU Commission. It involved complex upstream and downstream pass-on issues.
Brian is acting for a care home provider in this CMA investigation arising out of its major care home market investigation.
Brian advised and acted for Ryanair 2011-2016 in this major case involving the airline’s minority stake in Aer Lingus. It has involved three substantive appeals to the CAT and three appeals to the Court of Appeal.
Brian acted for the CMA in the defence of the decision not to refer the IRI/Aztec merger to Phase II.
Brian advised Cochlear in its successful response to a complaint made in the European Parliament regarding alleged anti-competitive conduct in the hearing implant medical devices market.
Brian has advised the Irish postal services operator on Brexit related issues.
Brian appeared for the airline in the CJEU in defending the General Court judgment in the Irish Air Travel Tax case and in Ryanair and Aer Lingus’ cross-appeal.
Brian is advising the TV channel media service provider on Brexit issues and the application of the AVMS Directive.
Brian is advising ComReg on the use of 2 GHz spectrum by ground stations in connection with the operation of a satellite mobile communications network. This concerns EU and international law and satellite-provided broadband services to passenger in aircraft across Europe.
Brian is acting for the airline in this test case concerning the interpretation of EU261 and whether cancellations caused by internal strikes constitute "extraordinary circumstances".
Brian acted for ESMA in its significant intervention restricting these products for retail investors in the EU. This is the first time these powers have been used.
Brian is acting for the GFSC in its discussions with EIOPA concerning the interpretation of Solvency II, and minimum capital requirement rules for insurers.
Brian appeared before the General Court and the CJEU for Mr Ezz and his wives whose assets have been frozen by the EU because of an alleged misappropriate of Egyptian State funds in conjunction with the Mubarak regime. The Ezz judgment is one of the leading cases in this area.
Brian acted for an individual subject to the EU Syrian sanctions on the ground of being employed by a company allegedly supplying crude oil to the Syrian government.
Brian acted for the FCA in this case before the CJEU involving unfair terms in mortgage loan agreements under EU law.
Brian acted for the Home Office in this important case concerning the proper appeal route for non-core family members of EU citizens who are third country nationals seeking to establish derived residence rights.
Brian acted for a leading Russian television presenter and journalist and the CEO of the Russian State news agency, in his challenge to sanctions which had been imposed on him because of his public statements, to which the Council objected. This case raised for the first time in the EU Russian sanctions cases how freedom of expression is restricted by restrictive measures.
Brian acted for a former Ukrainian Minister of Revenue and Duties in his challenge to EU sanctions, on the basis that the allegations made by the new administration were false and driven by the commercial interests of the new rulers in Ukraine.
Brian acted for a businessman listed on the EU Ukrainian sanctions regulation and decision for allegedly illegal conduct under the previous regime.
Brian acted for the SSHD in these appeals (and before the CJEU) relating to the scope of protection for non-EEA abandoned divorcees under the Citizenship Directive, and derived rights by virtue of their children’s EU citizenship rights and right to continued education in the host Member State.
Brian is advising the mobile network operator Three in relation to a major project to ensure compliance with the new EU Net Neutrality Regulation and rules on international roaming.
Brian acted for the UK in this case which concerns whether minimum interest rate clauses in mortgage loans granted to consumers were unfair under EU consumer protection law and whether a ruling to that effect could be limited to apply prospectively only.
Brian acted for the FCA in this case which concerned the interpretation of the Directive on Financial Collateral Arrangements, and whether that Directive applies only to collateral arrangements involving accounts used for settlement in securities settlement systems. The case also considers whether holders of collateral covered by the FCD should have priority over other registered creditors in an insolvency situation.
Brian acted for the UK in this case concerning the test for a close connection under Art 8(1) of Reg. 1215/2012 where two claims have different legal bases and create no risk of logical or legal incompatibility, but where the outcome of one claim may affect the other so that it would be expedient to hear them together.
Brian acted for Imperial Tobacco in its challenge to the UK Government’s plain lacks legislation. This major case, which led to one of the leading judgments in regulatory judicial review, concerned common law and ECHR property rights, EU free movement and trade mark law as well procedural fairness in the consultation. The challenge also claimed that the UK had misapplied the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control.
Brian acted for an intervener (the AIRE Centre) in this successful challenge to the policy of deporting homeless EU citizens who were exercising their free movement rights.
Brian acted for the FCA in this important case which determined the definition of a “regulated market” under MiFID and in particular whether that definition covered a trading system such as Euronext Fund Services which is limited to “open end” investment funds only, because the system is operated and managed by a market operator, which facilitates the bringing together of multiple fund agents and brokers who buy and sell interests in financial instruments.
Brian acted for the UK in this reference from the Upper Tribunal concerning EU citizenship and residence rights forunmarried couples where one party is a third country national.
Brian acted for the Department of Work and Pensions in this reference from the Supreme Court as to whether under EU social security law the claimant was entitled to the care component of the UK’s disability living allowance where the claimant had moved permanently to Spain and had long since ceased to work or have employment-based sickness coverage under the relevant UK schemes.
Brian acted for the applicant, listed on the EU Syrian regulation and decision, for allegedly supplying crude oil to the Syrian government.
Brian acted for the UK in this case which concernedwhether under the EU rules on consumer lending, the definition of a "creditor" included a peer-to-peer lending platform, or whether the person lending the funds other than in the course of business falls outside the scope of EU law entirely.
Brian advised the UK Government in this case in which the EU fisheries and agricultural agreements with Morocco were challenged on the ground that they violated the UN Charter and international law in recognising Moroccan jurisdiction over Western Sahara.
Acting for the airline in a major class action brought by hundreds of passengers and claims harvesting companies arising out of delays and EU rights, raising complicated jurisdiction and consumer issues. The airline succeeded in its Chancery Div trial, appeal listed in 2019.
Brian acted for the airline against the Civil Aviation Authority in the investigation arising from the cancellation of thousands of flights 2017.
Brian acted in an LCIA arbitration where competition issues (abuse of dominance) were raised in a dispute in the EU air transport sector. This case involved questions of discriminatory pricing and essential facilities.
Brian acted for defendants in a major competition law damages claim raised in an arbitration (settled).
Brian acted for the defendant in resisting this major Francovich damages claim arising from an alleged breach of the EU motor insurance rules.
Brian advised and assisted Three in this consultation.
Brian is acting for the claimant in this claim arising from the Irish Government’s decision to impose a discriminatory tax on airlines in breach of EU free movement rules. Trial is listed in late 2019.
Brian is a leading public and regulatory lawyer. He has a particular expertise in regulatory investigations, and in relation to sanctions, telecommunications, pharmaceuticals, utilities regulation and pensions. He is an expert in the interaction between domestic public law and EU law. He has appeared in many of the leading regulatory public law cases in the Admin Court and the CAT including BASCA, Gibraltar Betting and BAT (tobacco plain packs).
Brian has advised and acted for the UK Government in wide range of public law cases before the Court of Appeal, the Supreme Court and the CJEU covering immigration and EU citizenship issues. Brian has also advised tribunals and government agencies in Ireland, the Virgin Islands, Hong Kong and the Cayman Islands.
Brian is acting for National Grid Electricity Transmission in its dispute with Ofgem regarding the price control covering the major works needed to connect the new power station at Hinkley Seabank. This case concerns RIIO-1 and RIIO-2.
Brian is acting for National Grid Gas Transmission in its dispute with Ofgem regarding the reopening of the price control covering particular significant tunneling replacements.
Brian acted for musicians challenging the government’s private copying exemption. This is a leading case on the proper approach to expert and technical evidence in judicial review.
Brian acted for the claimant in this challenge to the new remote gambling taxation, which engaged the EU freedom to provide services and has led to a reference to the CJEU.
Brian acted for the claimant in this challenge to the new remote gambling licensing regime, which engaged the EU freedom to provide services and raised important issues regarding the application of EU law to Gibraltar.
Brian acted for the appellants in this challenge to the Determinations Panel of the Pensions Regulator. The question was whether the Panel had a discretion to allow the Pensions Regulator to rely on additional grounds which it had not mentioned in the warning notice issued to the target company. The Court of Appeal held that this discretion was not fettered by a “good reason” requirement.
Brian acted for Clearcast in successfully arguing that it was not amenable to judicial review. This was on the basis that the body acted on behalf of broadcasters for a commercial purpose, namely to advise on whether proposed advertisements were likely to survive scrutiny by the ASA.
Brian acted for the UK in this case about the citizenship right to reside of a woman who gave up her job in order to have and care for her child. Although she had no direct right under the Citizenship Directive, the CJEU extended the definition of worker under the Treaty to ensure that she was protected.
Brian acted for the applicant in this leading case on the basis for calculating, under domestic licences, legal expenses for foreign proceedings. This case is subject to appeal on the issue of whether the Treasury can justify the use of a “purchasing power parity” methodology in cases such as that of the prosecution of Mr Ezz in Egypt.
Brian acted for the UK in this important and politically significant case concerning the extent to which a Member State can limit social assistance to EEA nationals in the first three months of residence in that Member State, including jobseekers.
Brian acted for the SSHD in her successful appeal regarding the test for permanent residence under the Citizenship Directive and whether an applicant can count on rights acquired before accession to the EU.
Brian acted for the SSHD before the Court of Appeal in this case which relates to the power to deport the spouse of an EU citizen. This case examines the proper approach to the risk of re-offending.
Brian acted for the SSWP successfully in this appeal relating to EU social security requirements. This is also an important case for the relationship between the UK and Gibraltar.
Brian acted for the UK Government in this important challenge to the UK’s alleged acquiescence in a violation of the sovereignty of Western Sahara, addressing the status of UN Security Council and General Assembly resolutions, customary international law and justiciability issues.
Brian is acting for the claimant challenging the remedies imposed on hospital consultants under the CMA’s Private Healthcare Investigation Report and the CMA’s conclusions regarding competition in these markets. The case is pending before the Court of Appeal.
Brian acted for the regulator in this challenge to its 4G spectrum allocation and re-farming decision.
Brian acted for the regulator in this major margin squeeze case in the Caribbean.
Brian acted for Imperial Tobacco in its challenge to the EU’s Second Tobacco Products Directive. This important judgment of the CJEU establishes the limits of the EU’s internal market legislative competence in public health matters and on limiting IP rights on public health grounds.
Brian acted for the Secretary of State in this challenge to the policy of restricting access to parcels (including those containing books) in prisons.
Brian advised the ICRC in relation to the new EU legislation enacted in 2016, which threatened the ICRC’s rights under international human rights and humanitarian law. The ICRC won important concessions in this respect.
Brian is acting for the animal rights bodies in a series of cases before the ECA and before the European Ombudsman challenging the Agency’s approach to EU rules which seek to minimise animal testing.
Brian is one the leading sanctions lawyers in the EU. He has acted for over 40 designated persons and entities before the General Court and the Court of Justice. Brian has also been involved in the political and administrative process of persuading the EU and OFAC to delist individuals and businesses. Brian has advised Governments, banks and corporates on a wide range of compliance issues relating to the EU, US and domestic sanctions. He has assisted designated entities in dealing with the consequential effects of such restrictive measures in their own countries. Brian has also advised the Bank of England and HM Treasury on sanctions matters.
Brian acted for the plaintiff in this major trial in the Cayman Islands Grand Court concerning the interpretation of UN Libyan sanctions, the proper control of frozen Libyan state funds and claims of circumvention by those seeking to obtain control of the funds.
Brian is acting in the General Court for a Syrian businessman accused of assisting the regime.
Acting for the sons of the former president of Egypt and their wives, in challenging the EU sanctions imposed on the basis of alleged crimes in Egypt, notwithstanding that no evidence has been supplied to the Council in relation to the wives, the Egyptian courts have dismissed the allegations related to the sons and their single conviction, which is nevertheless spent, as well as their ongoing proceedings are marred by flagrant violations to Articles 6 & 7 ECHR.
Brian is acting for the wife of the former president of Egypt in challenging EU sanctions imposed on the basis of alleged crimes in Egypt, notwithstanding that no evidence has been supplied to the Council.
Brian is acting for Mr Ezz and his wives subject to EU sanctions arising from alleged crimes in Egypt contrary to the UN Convention against Corruption.
Brian is acted for the applicant, a former Ukrainian politician, in successfully overturning EU sanctions on the ground of lack of evidence. It was demonstrated that the EU had no evidence that the applicant had misappropriated State assets as alleged.
Brian acted for the applicant in this leading case in relation to the EU Tunisian sanctions, which establishes the kind of evidence required to overturn EU restrictive measures.
Brian is acting for the former Chief of Staff of the former Ukrainian President in challenging EU sanctions alleging misappropriation and corruption, on the grounds of breach of human rights and lack of evidence.
Brian acted for a Ukrainian businessman and former politician who had been subjected to sanctions on the grounds of alleged illegal conduct and corruption within the former administration. The Ukrainian request for the sanctions contained serious misrepresentations and the EU sanctions were annulled.
Brian acted for the applicant, listed on the EU Syrian regulation and decision, as the parent company of an entity allegedly supplying crude oil to the Syrian government.
Brian acts for this major Japanese multinational in relation to EU law sanctions issues.
Brian has extensive experience of regulatory issues and litigation before the RDC and Upper Tribunal. Brian has particular expertise in EU financial services issues and investigations by ESMA and EIOPA and the implications of Brexit for financial services. He acted for ESMA in the recent investigation concerning CFD and binary option trading by retail investors. Brian has advised and acted for the Financial Services Compensation Scheme in a number of important cases. Brian has acted for the FCA and the Bank of England in a number of important financial services cases before the European courts.
Brian acted for the UK in this important case on jurisdiction under the Insolvency Regulation. The CJEU found that the jurisdiction to rule on the determination of the debtor's assets falling with the scope of the effects of secondary insolvency proceedings lay with the courts of the Member State in which secondary insolvency proceedings had been opened, concurrently with the courts of the Member State in which the main proceedings had been opened.
Assisted the Financial Services Compensation Scheme via HM Treasury on these two major cases involving jurisdictional issues.
Brian is advising the family of former Egyptian president Mubarak in relation to a judicial review against the OFSI relating to licences to release frozen funds.
Brian acted for the FCA in this important case which determined whether, under MiFID, “the reception and transmission of an order” to a “portfolio manager” is an “investment service”.
Brian acted for the FCA in this important case relating to MiFID, the concept of ‘investment services and activities’, the provisions to ensure investor protection and the conduct of business obligations when providing investment services to clients. This is a leading case on the obligation to assess the suitability or appropriateness of the service to be provided and the contractual consequences of non-compliance with that obligation.
Brian acted for the FSCS in this case which concerned whether a “systemic crisis” allows the legal obligation of a Deposit Guarantee Scheme under EEA law to compensate savers to be reduced from the minimum guaranteed level to such sums as may be available to the DGS at that time.
Brian has advised extensively on these issues and represented clients before the FCA and the Tribunal.
Brian assisted the defendant banks in a major US financial services case arising from the operation of collective investment schemes in the UK.
Brian advised in relation to a major class action arising from the demise of Equitable Life.
Brian acted for a leading international group of oil traders in an FCA and US CFTC investigation.
Brian is one the UK's leading telecoms lawyers and has appeared in many of the leading telecoms cases in recent years, in the CAT, Court of Appeal and Court of Justice of the EU. Brian is acting for the Irish regulator ComReg in relation to telecoms satellite issues. Brian also acted for the telecoms regulator of the Virgin Islands in cases concerning abusive margin squeeze. Brian specialises in the overlap between telecommunications law and competition law.
Brian is acting for Three in its claim for restitution of Annual Licence Fees for 900 MHz and 1800 MHz spectum (over £30m) paid pursuant to an ultra vires public law instrument.
Brian advised Three in an Ofcom investigation into Three’s (and other MNOs’) advertising and presentation of call and data packages.
Brian advised Ofgem on the funding and resourcing of the UK Regulatory Network (UKRN) under the Better Regulation Principles and Schedule 1 of the Utilities Act 2000.
Brian acted for the mobile network operator Three in its judicial review of Ofcom's 5G mobile spectrum auction.
Brian has advised in relation to the consultation response and engagement with Ofcom on this matter in addition to compliance with the NGN rules regarding tariffs and billing.
Brian acted for Three in successfully persuading Ofcom to reconsider its decision on competition and auction design issues for the 2.3 and 3.4 GHz spectrum award, including reserve prices.
Brian advised a major telecoms operator in relation to State aid issues arising from the “refarm” of existing 2G spectrum holdings for 4G use.
Brian acted for the regulator in this challenge to a finding of dominance relating to ex ante regulation of international connectivity.
Brian has advised a major telecoms operator in relation to this investigation.
Brian advised and appeared for Three in this investigation.
Brian has established expertise in energy issues, and in particular price controls, emissions and energy trading. Brian is acting for National Grid in relation to the RIIO-1 and RIIO-2 price controls. He has also advised Ofgem on several competition law issues and acted for Shell in important competition and emissions trading cases. Brian has advised local authorities on renewables issues covering thermal recovery facilities and combined heat and power.
Brian acted for the UK in this case which addresses the roles of EU institutions in negotiating international agreements, here the Emissions Trading Agreement with Australia.
This case concerned a gas supply contract and arbitration between Gazprom, E.ON Ruhrgas International and the Lithuanian State Property Fund and the extent to which the arbitration could issue a form of anti-suit injunction preventing the parties from litigating in the State courts.
Brian advised the Department for Energy and Climate Change on the Tempus Energy and Tempus Energy Technology v Commission (T-793/14) case challenging the Commission’s decision not to raise objections to UK State aid which is to be paid under the newly implemented scheme called the Capacity Market.
Brian has advised major operators on Ofgem investigations regarding compliance with standard licence conditions in gas and electricity supply licences.
Brian acted for Shell in its challenge to the EU Commission’s decision on allocation of “carbon credits” in the EU emissions trading scheme.
Brian advised in relation to the Energy-from-Waste infrastructure plant which forms the backbone of the Greater Manchester Waste Disposal Authority's £4.4 billion waste PFI contract with Viridor and Laing.
Brian has substantial experience in the Commercial Court and the Chancery Division and before arbitral tribunals. Brian has acted in a number of the largest commercial cases brought in the UK involving claims based on competition law breaches. Brian has appeared in commercial cases in Hong Kong, Ireland, the Cayman Island and the BVI. He is expert in the overlap between commercial and regulatory work, in areas such as energy, pharmaceuticals, aviation and telecommunications. Brian has also litigated in the commercial courts many of the contractual issues arising from the sanctions imposed by the EU and the US on companies and individuals.
Acting for the defendant, the former owner of a major Russian construction company in a £100m claim brought by a Russian bank.
Brian acted for the claimant in a major breach of contract action in the English Commercial Court arising from Ryanair’s decision to allow its tickets to be sold through travel agents.
Brian acted for the UK in this leading case on the compatibility of worldwide freezing orders which affect third parties and the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU. The CJEU held that the provisions in the standard form English order sufficed for that purpose.
Brian acted successfully for the UK in this case relating to the circumstances in which a court may refuse to recognise a judgment on public policy grounds.
Brian acted for the former Finance Director of Bernard Madoff’s UK operation in resisting the claims by the trustee of Mr Madoff’s US businesses for recovery of all of the sums which Mr Madoff obtained by fraud.
Brian acted for the Bank in this leading case on the requirements of service of proceedings under EU law in international litigation.
International arbitration is a significant part of Brian’s commercial practice. He has advised or appeared in many of the main arbitral centres, including London, Hong Kong, Paris and Dubai and before the German Institute of Arbitration. Brian has particular expertise in arbitrating competition law issues. He has represented clients in arbitration proceedings across a broad spectrum of industries, including: aviation; construction and infrastructure; energy and mining; finance and banking; insurance; transport; and telecommunications. Brian has also represented private investors in substantial investor-state disputes.
Brian acted for one of the main parties in the LCIA arbitration involving the aluminium trading consortium SUAL and Glencore regarding a disputed $47bn aluminium supply deal.
Brian is acting for the claimant in a major LCIA arbitration concerning contracts with French airport authorities.
Brian is acting for the claimant in a major LCIA arbitration concerning contracts with Cypriot airport authorities.
Brian had advised extensively on arbitral claims arising from bilateral investment treaties with Russia, Ukraine and various EU Member States arising from the consequences of the sanctions imposed on certain businesses in Ukraine and Russia.
Brian has substantial experience in the Commercial Court and the Chancery Division in fraud and injunctive work, including tracing cases. Brian has acted in many of the leading cases regarding jurisdiction and freezing orders and has represented claimants and defendants in several recent major cases in England and overseas. Brian has a particular expertise in litigating cartel cases, and the overlap between antitrust law and common law conspiracy, deceit and fraudulent misrepresentation.
Brian’s public law and EU law practice has involved detailed consideration of a number of complex public international law matters. Brian has extensive experience in international tribunals and has written widely on these matters. He has advised the Foreign Office in relation to a range of PIL matters and has acted for litigants arguing PIL points in domestic tribunals in Egypt, Tunisia and Ukraine.
Brian regularly appears before football and rugby arbitral tribunals and before the Court of Arbitration of Sport (CAS), as well as the Court of Appeal and the Court of Justice and General Court of the EU in sports cases. Brian has a particular interest in betting and gaming and advised Gibraltar based operators in relation to restrictions imposed by the UK Government in 2015.
Brian was appointed to the Sports Advocacy Section of the London 2012 Olympic and Paralympic Pro Bono Legal Advice and Representation Service. Brian was listed in “The World’s 20 Most Influential Sports Lawyers” in SportBusiness International and World Sports Law Report magazine in 2009.
Brian acted for the Premiership in its defence of a complaint to the EU Commission claiming that the third party ownership rules breached EU competition law.
Brian acted for Chelsea in the CAS appeal by the Italian clubs seeking to avoid their liability for the damages award made in relation to Adrian Mutu.
Brian acted for Chelsea FC and Mr Matic in this serious disciplinary matter arising from on-pitch violence against a Burnley player in the 2015 Premiership.
Brian acted for the Ukrainian club in its CAS appeal against exclusion for match-fixing from the Champions League play offs.
Brian acted for the Turkish club in CAS in respect of its expulsion from the Champions League because of match fixing allegations.
Brian regularly acts for the FA in disputes with clubs.
Brian has advised the Football Conference on disputes with other leagues and commercial and competition matters.
Brian assisted Nike in relation to its advertising and marketing before and during the London 2012 Games.
Brian has advised professional clubs and sportswear manufacturers and distributors in Ireland and the UK regarding the lawfulness of exclusive supply and purchase agreements.
Brian has extensive experience in media and broadcasting litigation, particularly in the overlap between media/broadcasting law and EU law. Brian has particular expertise in the legal issues arising from new technologies and market developments in this field, deploying his existing expertise in telecommunications law and competition law.
Brian has acting in this major dispute regarding the restrictions on artists using part major venues in UK and US.
Brian has advised in relation to licensing and copyright issues in respect of music downloaded into YouTube.
Brian has assisted BPI in its examination of on-line treatment of illegal music sites.
Brian advised the UK financial media on legal issues arising from this EU legislation.
Brian advised DCMS in relation to the threatened EU Commission infraction proceedings.
Brian advised independent music companies on competition issues arising from the Universal/EMI merger.
Brian has advised a mobile operator in relation to a number of cases brought against it by the ASA.
Advising a prominent video streaming service in relation to the application of the AVMS Directive to a paid-for movies-on-demand service.
Brian has considerable experience of litigating State aid points before the EU courts and domestically. He has advised private litigants and the UK Government on a wide range of State aid matters, in particular in relation to export credit financing and spectrum allocation in telecommunications.
Brian acted for Ryanair in the General Court and the CJEU in its challenge against the Commission’s State aid decision in respect of Ireland’s Air Travel Tax (ATT).
Brian acted for musicians claiming that the private copying exemption from copyright was a State aid to cloud providers and other beneficiaries of the measure.
Brian is acting for Ryanair in resisting the State’s claim for repayment of the ATT found to be a State aid on the grounds of a set off and Francovich counterclaim.
Brian has advised the GMWDA in relation to State aid compliance on a number of occasions.
“Anti-trust forum-shopping in England: is Provimi Ltd v Aventis correct?” (May 2010) CPI Anti-Trust Journal 46 (cited in Cooper Tire & Rubber Co v Shell Chemicals UK Ltd  EWCA Civ 864 and Toshiba Carrier UK Ltd v KME Yorkshire Ltd  EWHC 2665 (Ch) at ).
Co-author of Human Rights Law and Practice edited by Lester & Pannick (3rd ed., 2009) – chapters on Article 6 and 8 ECHR and Administrative Court: Practice and Procedure (1st ed., 2006).
Major author of the chapter on competition law in the 2nd edition of Sport: Law and Practice (eds. Lewis and Taylor)(2008).
Author of the competition law chapters in Schmitthoff’s Export Trade (11th ed.)(2007) and Employee Competition (2007).
Co-author (with David Vaughan QC) of Competition Law: Abuse of a Dominant Position (2005) in the Encyclopedia of EU Law (eds Vaughan and Robertson).
“Judicial Review and the Competition Appeal Tribunal” (2006) Judicial Review.
“Damages actions before the CAT and the passing on defence” (2004) Competition Law Journal 238.
Until he took silk, Brian was a member of the Attorney-General’s ‘A’ Panel.
Appointed to the Sports Advocacy Section of the London 2012 Olympic and Paralympic Pro Bono Legal Advice and Representation Service.
Software Cellular Network Ltd v T-Mobile (UK) Ltd  All ER (D) 314.
On 5 March 2019, after five years of litigation, the Council had confirmed the removal of all sanctions on Mr Andriy Klyuyev.
On 27 February 2018, the Court of Justice of the European Union (‘CJEU’) handed down its judgment in Case C-266/16 Western Sahara Campaign  ECLI:EU:C:2018:118.
The General Court has handed down an important judgment in Case T-731/15, Sergiy Klyuyev v Council (21 February 2017).

References: CJEU 
 Art 101
 Art 101
 CJEU 
 CJEU 
 CJEU 
 CJEU 
 Art 8
 CJEU 
 CJEU 
 CJEU 
 CJEU 
 CJEU 
 CJEU 
 EWCA