Challenge

The European Commission had started investigating violations of the rule of law in Poland, initiating infringement proceedings regarding judicial independence in the country. The Venice Commission, an advisory body to the Council of Europe, had also expressed reservations about all parts of the Polish judiciary, especially over the Polish public prosecution’s independence.

Our client, the former CEO of a Polish investment bank, was caught in the middle of this battle by being at the receiving end of disproportional measures by the prosecution in Poland. The Polish government who started treating bankers in the context of the “GetBack” scandal as “banksters” created a political climate which put our client in custody without bail. Anticipating that the Polish government wanted to represent the case as an effort to protect the public by blaming the investment bankers’ business conduct, he reached out to Alber & Geiger.

Strategy

We approached several DGs in the European Commission and all the responsible committees in the European Parliament demonstrating that this was a practical case confirming the EU concerns stated in the infringement proceedings against Poland.

We gathered thereby EU political support towards the Polish government ensuring that our client receives fair trial and proportionate treatment as to be expected from an EU member state. We did so by informing the EU institutions over the shortcomings of the legal process in Poland and the unjustifiable measures against our client, placing our case on the European Commission’s radar in the ongoing infringement proceeding against Poland and into the European Parliament’s resolution on the rule of law and democracy in Poland.

Results

By introducing the Polish court case into EU politics, Alber & Geiger was able to take Polish politics out of the courtroom. The client was released from custody on bail.

Challenge

The European Commission initiated anti-dumping proceedings concerning imports of polyvinyl alcohol (PVA) originating from China. The investigation on the dumped PVA was worth more than $33 million. Solutia, a U.S. Fortune 500 firm and a Monsanto spin off, was one of the parties concerned by this investigation. Solutia relied heavily on PVA to produce polyvinyl butyral (PVB), a material used in glass, construction and auto industries. With only 5-months’ notice, Solutia sought Alber & Geiger’s help to avoid import duties on PVA.

Strategy

Alber & Geiger produced a narrative that included an understanding of the Chinese economy and the PVA market in China. Our message was strongly embedded in the European Commission’s approach to trade and competition law, while taking into account the global political consensus on Chinese PVA dumping. More concretely, we put forward arguments that the dumping was a natural consequence of China’s macro-economic situation and production pressures.

Our team demonstrated that other market factors had contributed to the EU economic injury. We argued that the European Commission had not shown a causal link between the detriments suffered by the EU market and dumped imports from China. Moreover, our message cast doubt on the way the European Commission had defined the market of PVA in light of the broader range PVA uses.

Results

Alber & Geiger’s lobbying activity led to the European Commission revising its preliminary duties decision on PVA imports. As we had argued, the European Commission concluded that there was no evidence that would link dumping and injury. The tariffs were lifted. Solutia’s profitability and position on the global market remained intact.

Challenge

Our client, a Lottery Association, was faced with a network of monopolistic EU Member State laws and regulations that impeded the ability of its members – all private lottery operators – to exercise EU market freedoms. Alber & Geiger was enlisted to steer the developing legal framework in the field of gambling law and tear down restrictions of private lotteries in Europe. The challenge was to politically link the freedom of establishment with cross border lotteries based on the CJEU’s decisions on gambling freedom.

Strategy

The strategy was built upon the respected Opinion of our Chairman on the Gambelli case when he was a Advocate General at the CJEU. The Opinion was used as a roadmap for judicial and legislative change during this seminal mandate. It articulated the narrow circumstances where a restriction on freedom of establishment would be justifiable by general interest concerns.

The strategy was structured on all levels according to the integral components of the Opinion. It utilized the intellectual resources of our firm to co-ordinate the legislative dialogue in a direction that facilitated the creation of a EU wide free gambling market. We provided components of the machinery as well as oiling the cogs of law reform.

Results

We provided long term, fixed judicial capital for our client and legislative change. Due to the ongoing successful execution of our strategy, recent judgments of the CJEU with respect to German and Austrian gambling restrictions have been echoing the Opinion.

The CJEU now professes that in order to justify monopolistic state gambling regulations legislation must “ensure a particularly high level of protection” and a “coherent” gambling market. There must now be specific and narrow circumstances to legitimize curtailments to the freedom of establishment in the gambling market. This CJEU strategy must now be followed by the European Commission when checking EU Member States’ gambling restrictions.