Challenge

A US Fortune 500 chemical company approached Alber & Geiger seeking regulatory and advocacy support over a European Union proposal that would have classified Titanium Dioxide as a cat.2 suspected carcinogen by inhalation. Such a decision would have affected our client’s revenue and increased risk of similar regulatory measures in the other jurisdictions across the globe.

Strategy

With the experts opinion from the ECHA’s Risk Assessment Committee delivered to the European Commission, our team quickly embarked on a campaign aimed at highlighting the broader ramifications of classification on other EU policies and beyond Titanium Dioxide.

We pursued a strategy that put the spotlight on loss of consumer choice, impact on jobs and EU competitiveness as well as cost to downstream users. Alber & Geiger also broadened the issue to include political considerations and other players. On top of the European Commission, in particular DG Envi and DG Grow and the Member States’ Competent Authorities, we reached out to the Permanent Representations of the Member States as well as select Members of the European Parliament.

Results

Our advocacy helped thwart the original carcinogen classification that would have harmed our client. Through active engagement at the regulatory and political level, we helped find a suitable compromise for our client, which was then mirrored in the European Commission amended proposal.

Instead of outright carcinogen labelling on Titanium Dioxide, the European Commission changed its position by agreeing for classification to apply to Titanium Dioxide in powder form, only on the level of manufacture and without carcinogenicity labelling in the end products.

Challenge

The Maidan Square disaster on the eve of the Ukrainian Revolution and the following fall of Yanukovych’s government, triggered the Russian annexation of Crimea and a souring of the relationship between Russia and the West.

On March 5, 2014 the EU Council froze the assets of 18 former Ukrainian high-ranking officials, suspected of involvement in the Maidan Square disaster and misappropriation of state property. Among them Mykola Azarov, the former Prime Minister of Ukraine, and his son Oleksii Azarov, turned to Alber & Geiger for help.

Strategy

The strategy employed was built on an awareness of the full scope of the rule of law in Europe today, looking at the procedural fairness surrounding the sanctions. It required a subtle deployment of innovative legal arguments and emotional intelligence to navigate through the political turbulence, EU officials and peripheral actors to the institutions, for Alber & Geiger to demonstrate their innocence with strong convictions about their executive culpability.

We put forward that the freezing of funds was of a persecutive nature and not within EU competence. The three pronged approach attacked the premise of the sanctions at the right places and times. Alber & Geiger challenged the (1) legality, (2) legitimacy and (3) non-arbitrariness of the action, grasping all the potential playmakers.

Results

Ultimately the we were able to successfully get the freezing orders imposed on Oleksii Azarov removed, and considerably improve the position of Mykola Azarov. We made clear that the arbitrary targeting of individuals lacked a sufficient legal premise.

Through diligent fact finding we were able to cast doubt on the premise of the government’s alleged responsibility in the first place. We ultimately managed to help reinforce the rule of law, getting platform for the notions of fairness and equitable treatment of individuals into the public forum at a time when fairness was not an institutional priority.

Challenge

INTCO is a Chinese company and the world market leader in medical disposable gloves. The company plays a central role in securing reliable, high-quality medical supplies for hospitals, healthcare providers, and patients worldwide.

The European Commission considered applying the International Procurement Instrument (IPI), which could restrict third-country suppliers’ access to EU public tenders. For INTCO, this risked exclusion from medical procurements across the Union—threatening supply continuity, competitive pricing, and Europe’s preparedness for future health emergencies, including the next pandemic.

Strategy

Alber & Geiger engaged the European Commission and the European Parliament, and coordinated with key Member States to prevent discriminatory treatment under the IPI. We made the cross-institutional case that open competition in medical tenders strengthens supply resilience, affordability, and strategic autonomy, safeguarding the Union’s readiness for the next pandemic.

Results

INTCO preserved full access to EU procurement and maintained its ability to compete in medical tenders across Europe. European hospitals retained reliable and affordable access to essential disposable gloves and supplies—reinforcing the Union’s health security and preparedness for future crises.