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.

Challenge

Alber & Geiger assisted a US Fortune 500 chemical company to tackle the issue of illegal trade of refrigerants. For years, illegal trade of old generation refrigerants in Europe, prevented and delayed the introduction of high-end, climate friendly solutions. In parallel, the ongoing revision of the EU F-Gas Regulation was not delivering the expected results on phasing down the use of HFCs, as stricter penalties and measures to control illegal trade could only be enforced on a Member State level.

Strategy

Our team therefore embarked on a legislative initiative in Germany, which would offer a national solution that would inspired other Member States to use the German law as a blueprint. Alber & Geiger enforced a strategy which appealed to all levels of the German political institutions and administration. We supported the proposal on the level of the federal government, while in parallel gathering support at various political levels. Moving forward successfully, we managed to get our arguments through to stakeholders also in the European Union.

Results

On a first stage, Alber & Geiger supported a draft legislation which was in favor of our client’s expectations. On a second stage, our team also saw through the clearance of the German legislation from the EU Commission and inspire other Member States follow the German path. Finally, we locked the support from the German upper house and rapporteurs of the lower house, succeeding in the eventual speedy adoption of the legislation, which will be hopefully used as a blueprint solution in the EU.

Challenge

Under the tobacco advertising directive, the EU Commission’s goal was to hunt down ‘insidious forms’ of tobacco advertising. For this reason, the directive had addressed both direct and indirect advertising to close loopholes. Davidoff and Lancaster had been accused of indirect tobacco advertising through the marketing of perfume products. The challenge was to convince the EU Commission in particular and the EU institutions in general that promoting the Davidoff brand image was not tobacco advertising.

Strategy

The strategy focused on the differentiation between direct and indirect tobacco advertising which the directive had established. The latter being mainly based on a brand diversification strategy of companies. In most cases these brand diversifications were meanwhile brand products of their own, not connected to tobacco products in any way.

But the directive’s wording not only addressed the marketing and advertising of such a diversification product like perfumes or clothes. It actually also addressed the diversification product itself, considering the sheer existence of the perfume as indirect tobacco advertising.

Results

We prevented the EU Commission from getting entangled into a wasteful litigation that would have compromised legitimate economic activity. Insofar as issues for Davidoff remained unresolved by lobbying we successfully executed a CJEU case.