White & Case has announced the expansion of its Global Antitrust Practice with the appointment of Ingo Brinker as a partner in Germany. Brinker will be based in Düsseldorf, further strengthening the firm’s presence in key antitrust jurisdictions.
Mark Gidley, Head of the Global Antitrust Practice at White & Case, emphasized the importance of investing in crucial antitrust markets worldwide. “As one of the global elite antitrust firms, we must continue to invest in the key antitrust jurisdictions globally. As a pioneer and driver of global antitrust enforcement trends, especially in the EU, Germany is one such jurisdiction,” Gidley stated.
Brinker’s addition comes at a time of increasing client demand for antitrust expertise, particularly in mergers and private damages actions. With his extensive experience advising on both contentious and non-contentious antitrust matters, including cases within the technology sector, Brinker is poised to make significant contributions to the firm’s German antitrust team.
“Ingo’s unique experience advising on both contentious and non-contentious antitrust law makes him an ideal addition to our team there, particularly his experience advising on cases in the technology sector,” remarked Gidley.
Brinker brings over 30 years of experience to White & Case, having previously served as a partner at Gleiss Lutz Hootz Hirsch. His expertise encompasses various aspects of German and European antitrust law, including merger control, investigations, compliance programs, and litigation before prominent regulatory bodies and courts such as the European Commission, the European General Court, the European Court of Justice, the German Federal Cartel Office, and the German antitrust courts.
Furthermore, Brinker’s leadership role as the Chairman of the Studienvereinigung Kartellrecht, the association of German, Austrian, and Swiss antitrust lawyers and economists, underscores his stature within the legal community.
Source: WhiteCase
Featured News
Electrolux Fined €44.5 Million in French Antitrust Case
Dec 19, 2024 by
CPI
Indian Antitrust Body Raids Alcohol Giants Amid Price Collusion Probe
Dec 19, 2024 by
CPI
Attorneys Seek $525 Million in Fees in NCAA Settlement Case
Dec 19, 2024 by
CPI
Italy’s Competition Watchdog Ends Investigation into Booking.com
Dec 19, 2024 by
CPI
Minnesota Judge Approves $2.4 Million Hormel Settlement in Antitrust Case
Dec 19, 2024 by
CPI
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – CRESSE Insights
Dec 19, 2024 by
CPI
Effective Interoperability in Mobile Ecosystems: EU Competition Law Versus Regulation
Dec 19, 2024 by
Giuseppe Colangelo
The Use of Empirical Evidence in Antitrust: Trends, Challenges, and a Path Forward
Dec 19, 2024 by
Eliana Garces
Some Empirical Evidence on the Role of Presumptions and Evidentiary Standards on Antitrust (Under)Enforcement: Is the EC’s New Communication on Art.102 in the Right Direction?
Dec 19, 2024 by
Yannis Katsoulacos
The EC’s Draft Guidelines on the Application of Article 102 TFEU: An Economic Perspective
Dec 19, 2024 by
Benoit Durand