Challenge

The Gauselmann Group, one of the largest producers and operators of games of chance in Europe, called on Alber & Geiger when faced with a number of threatening gambling regulations in Germany, Austria, Hungary, Netherlands, Romania, Serbia, Slovakia and the Czech Republic. Alber & Geiger had to convince the European Commission to make a counterintuitive political risk in confronting a powerful Member State, Germany and concurrently convince the European Commission that our interpretation would stand up to CJEU scrutiny.

Strategy

Given the limited scope of directly ascertainable EU competence, the strategy employed an abstracted analytical formula to show that the various regulations were legally incoherent. It demonstrated that the laws of the Member States contradicted their own main goals on a substantive level. It utilized the jurisprudential architecture of the CJEU in lieu of their crystallization.

The multifaceted strategy also incorporated an economic dimension. Concurrently, the same technique allowed us to demonstrate that the money laundering directive could not arbitrarily encompass all the gambling operators without distinction of risk volume and activity.

Results

Ultimately, we managed to convince the European Commission to act. Its omission to launch infringement proceedings had been rebuked. Alber & Geiger was able to safeguard fundamental liberties and freedoms by bringing EU instruments into a new field and challenging archaic but powerful structures. We were also able to hold the scope of the money laundering directive back, establishing a distinction between casinos and other gambling operators.

Challenge

Within a climate of instigated political fear in the USA for China’s corporations, Huawei was starting to have a credibility problem in the EU, despite adherence to EU standards and a strong commitment to Europe. Huawei’s reputation and thus business development being at risk over its products’ cyber security concerns, Alber & Geiger was called to mitigate these concerns and build support in Europe.

A major focus was the 5G rollout under the EU toolbox in several European member states. The respective European cybersecurity strategy conflicted with the bilateral corporation agreement several EU member states had signed with the United States on cybersecurity, especially targeting Chinese suppliers like Huawei.

Strategy

Alber & Geiger targeted key Members of the European Parliament in all relevant committees and across the political spectrum, to emphasize Huawei’s commitment to Europe, adherence to EU standards and contribution to the European economy through leading products and services, jobs creation and investments in research and development. In that context we established an alternate strategy with the European Commission and related EU agencies to show that Huawei is fully integrated in the EU market and successful for business reasons only.

Results

Our engagement demonstrated to EU law makers that there was no Chinese government involvement in Huawei’s business strategies, let alone any cyber security issue with Huawei’s devices. By doing so, we advanced Huawei’s business interests in Europe.

Challenge

The Port of Belgrade’s property and investor rights were being violated by arbitrary Serbian legislation. There were limited domestic channels for these rights to be rectified and the Port of Belgrade was about to lose significant holdings. It turned to Alber & Geiger for help.

Strategy

The strategy made use of the new supra-national extraterritoriality, which post-communist states have been using to reconstitute certain rights and obligations. It addressed the EU institutions and Member States while Serbia was in the process of fulfilling its obligation to attain EU candidate status. It put forward comprehensive legal analysis that employed the entirety of the acquis communautaire, helping the legal narrative of the Serbian government and that of the Commission come together in a coherent mutually beneficial form.

Results

Alber & Geiger’s lobbing activity raised the awareness of European Parliament and the Commission towards the rights violations. We persuaded the European Commission to pressure the Serbian government into changing the content of these laws and to bring them in line with the EU acquis communautaire.