Roundtable

24 November 2017 : Innovative Partnerships in a competitive landscape : Meet our experts

24 November 2017 : Innovative Partnerships in a competitive landscape : Meet our experts

24 November 2017 : Innovative Partnerships in a competitive landscape : Meet our experts

23.10.2017 BE law

Our Competition law and TMT teams have the pleasure of inviting you to a seminar on Innovative Partnerships, which will take place at our offices on 24 November 2017.

The digitizing economy pushes enterprises to create synergies and invest in innovative partnerships with competent and specialized service providers, allowing them to focus on their core business. Efficient partnerships require clear and sustainable contractual arrangements. Also, partnerships may involve the leveraging of significant market powers.

In this session, we will focus on key contractual terms inter alia on protecting your IP, know-how and other intangible assets, the rights to data, respective liabilities etc. We will also focus on arrangements that could be sensitive from a competition law perspective and workable solutions.

Our teams will share our best practices and discuss their insights with you. This seminar will be moderated by Hendrik Viaene, head of our Competition Law practice and by Erik Valgaeren, head of the TMT practice. Introductory presentations to the topic will be given by Delphine Gillet, senior associate in the Competition Law practice and Carolien Michielsen, junior associate in the TMT practice.

To ensure that the debate will be conducted most effectively, we inform you that attendance is limited to one person per company.

This expert meeting will take place at our offices in Brussels on the 24th of November 2017, from 12:00pm tot 2:00pm.

If you are interested in attending this seminar, please contact Sofie.VanYperzeele@stibbe.com.

Team

Related news

01.08.2019 NL law
General court dismisses all five appeals in the optical disk drives cartel

Short Reads - The General Court recently upheld a Commission decision finding that suppliers of optical disk drives colluded in bids for sales to Dell and HP by engaging in a network of parallel bilateral contacts over a multi-year period. The General Court rejected applicants' arguments regarding the Commission's fining methodology, including that the Commission ought to have provided reasons for not departing from the general methodology set out in its 2006 Guidelines.

Read more

01.08.2019 NL law
Brand owners beware: Commission tough on cross-border sales restrictions

Short Reads - The European Commission recently imposed a EUR 6.2 million fine on Hello Kitty owner Sanrio for preventing its licensees from selling licensed merchandising products across the entire EEA. Sanrio is the second licensor (after Nike) to be fined for imposing territorial sales restrictions on its non-exclusive licensees for licensed merchandise. A third investigation into allegedly similar practices by Universal Studios is ongoing. The case confirms the Commission's determination to tackle these practices, regardless of type or form.

Read more

08.08.2019 BE law
Regulating online platforms: piece of the puzzle

Articles - The new Regulation no. 2019/1150 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 June 2019 on promoting fairness and transparency for business users of online intermediation services, applicable as of 12 July 2020, is another piece of the puzzle regulating online platforms, this time focussing on the supply side of the platforms.

Read more

01.08.2019 NL law
Call of duty: Commission must state reasons when straying from its guidelines

Short Reads - The European Commission has lost a second battle concerning its EUR 15 million fine imposed upon interdealer broker ICAP, this time before the European Court of Justice. The Court upheld the previous judgment of the General Court on the basis of the Commission's failure to state reasons concerning its fining methodology of cartel facilitator ICAP. This may lead to more reasoned Commission decisions in the future - deterrence of cartel behaviour does not justify keeping the methodology for setting the fines as a 'black box'.

Read more

Our website uses functional cookies for the functioning of the website and analytic cookies that enable us to generate aggregated visitor data. We also use other cookies, such as third party tracking cookies - please indicate whether you agree to the use of these other cookies:

Privacy – en cookieverklaring