Inside Stibbe

Stibbe announces new Counsel and Of Counsel appointments

Stibbe announces new Counsel and Of Counsel appointments

Stibbe announces new Counsel and Of Counsel appointments

09.01.2020 BE law

Brussels, 9 January 2020 – The Brussels office of Stibbe has promoted Delphine Gillet (EU/Competition), Jan Proesmans (Employment, Benefits, and Pensions) and Sophie Bourgois (Dispute Resolution) to Counsel and Elisabeth Baeyens (Dispute Resolution) to Of Counsel. The new appointments have taken effect on 1 January 2020.

Nederlandstalige versie | Version française

Stibbe Brussels has appointed three new Counsel and one Of Counsel: Delphine Gillet from the EU/Competition practice, pensions specialist Jan Proesmans, international arbitration expert Sophie Bourgois, and criminal law expert Elisabeth Baeyens. These new appointments demonstrate Stibbe’s commitment in promoting home-grown talent to respond continuously to the demands of the market.

Delphine Gillet (EU/Competition) assists clients in European and Belgian competition law, including merger control, cartels, and abuse of dominance. She also specialises in state aid, general EU law and regulatory, and represents clients before the Belgian Competition Authority and regulators, the EU Commission, Belgian courts and the EU courts in Luxembourg. Delphine is a very competent lawyer whose Counsel appointment and specialist knowledge of EU competition and procedural EU law allow Stibbe to respond to the ever-evolving developments in EU and Belgian competition law and sector regulation.

Jan Proesmans (Employment, Benefits, and Pensions) has specific in-depth expertise in pension law, covering pension regulations in all sectors, both private and public. He also handles the pensions and employment law aspects in corporate transactions. Furthermore, Jan represents clients in complex litigations before the Belgian labour courts. Jan’s promotion to Counsel solidifies the pension law practice at Stibbe Brussels.

Sophie Bourgois (Dispute Resolution) is an accredited mediator since 2014 and focuses her practice on international dispute settlement as well as public and private international law. She assists foreign States and international organisations regularly in cross-border disputes and arbitration proceedings. In addition, Sophie has specific expertise in insurance law, mainly handling cases relating to major damage and loss claims. Sophie’s appointment to Counsel allows Stibbe to continue to develop its international arbitration practice.

Elisabeth Baeyens (Dispute Resolution) is a criminal law expert specialising in white-collar crime and in pleading complex criminal matters before the Belgian Court of Cassation. In 2015, she passed the Court of Cassation bar exam. Elisabeth’s promotion to Of Counsel will contribute to the further expansion of Stibbe’s white-collar crime practice. Her expertise in advising on cassation appeal matters is certainly a distinguishing feature in the offering of the Litigation and Criminal Law practice at Stibbe Brussels.

Wouter Ghijsels, Managing Partner of Stibbe Brussels, says: “Stibbe has always invested in home-grown talent, so we are particularly proud to promote Delphine, Jan, Sophie, and Elisabeth and to give them the opportunity to develop their legal careers and continue to grow within the firm. They are strong technical lawyers that will play a pivotal role in the development of their respective practices in the coming years. As leading individuals in their field, they deliver added-value to our clients.

Team

Related news

02.12.2021 EU law
ECJ: private enforcement in aviation sector also a national court's game

Short Reads - Recently, the ECJ ruled that national courts dealing with private enforcement cases are competent to apply EU competition law to historical behaviour in the aviation sector, regardless of public enforcement by the Commission and national competition authorities, and regardless of whether or not such authorities had authority to pursue public enforcement in the relevant period.

Read more

02.12.2021 NL law
Google Shopping: self-preferencing is a form of abuse of dominance

Short Reads - On 10 November 2021, the General Court (GC) almost entirely dismissed Google’s action against the European Commission’s Google Shopping decision. According to the European Commission (the Commission), Google illegally favoured its own comparison shopping service by displaying it more prominently in its search results than other comparison shopping services (see our July 2017 Newsletter). The Commission found that Google was abusing its dominant position and imposed a EUR 2.42 billion.

Read more

02.12.2021 NL law
Gun jumping: beware, the Commission will take action

Short Reads - The Commission has imposed interim measures on Illumina and GRAIL. These measures include the obligation to run GRAIL by independent management. By adopting interim measures in addition to opening an investigation into whether Illumina and Grail breached the standstill obligation, the Commission has made clear it will not shy away from tough action against gun jumping during an ongoing merger review. 

Read more

02.12.2021 NL law
Back to the future – Commission publishes roadmap for green and digital challenges

Short Reads - The Commission’s Communication “A competition policy fit for new challenges” (link) (the “Communication”) identifies key areas in which competition law and policy can support European efforts in dealing with the challenges of the green and digital transitions. The document covers all areas of competition law (antitrust, merger control, and State aid) and identifies various ways in which new and existing tools can contribute to addressing these challenges.

Read more

02.12.2021 NL law
Dominant firm may refuse to supply retailer after initial delivery

Articles - The Brussels Court of Appeal has held that a dominant producer firm may have valid reasons to refuse further supplies to a retailer, despite its dominance and despite previous deliveries. The Court of Appeal stressed the freedom for any company, including dominant firms, to choose their trading partners, in particular when there are valid and objective non-discriminatory reasons to refuse further direct supplies and when the retailer has alternative sources of supply.

Read more