The Legal 500

Chambers of Christopher Rees

20 CATHEDRAL ROAD, CARDIFF, CF11 9LJ, WALES
Tel:
Work 02920 232032
Fax:
Fax 02920 233636
DX:
141874 CARDIFF 28
Web:
www.apexchambers.net
Email:

Alexander Greenwood

Tel:
Work 029 2023 2032
Email:
Apex Chambers (Chambers of Christopher Rees)

Position

Alex specialises in regulatory prosecutions and criminal law and was formerly a solicitor. Alex is on the Health and Safety Executes advocates list. He is a Grade 4 prosecutor and rape panel advocate. In 2008 he led the representation of a local authority in the Pennington Inquiry into the UK’s second largest outbreak of e-coli 0157. The inquiry was the first under the Inquiries Act 2005 and the first to be ordered by the Welsh Assembly Government. Alex prosecutes and advises local authorities throughout England and Wales and has recently undertaken one of the first prosecutions of a pyramid selling scheme under the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008. Many prosecutions include significant confiscation proceedings. Last year he appeared before Lord Justice Leveson presiding in the Court of Appeal in the case of R v Cairns and others (2013) EWCA Crlm 467 which restated the guiding principles in respect of basis of pleas. Alex has also prosecuted for the Illegal Money Lending Unit, The British Recorded Music Industry, the Federation Against Copyright Theft, the Environment Agency and Natural Resources Wales. Alex also regularly lectures and trains legal and enforcement officers on recent developments in the law and produces a regular update for those prosecuting enforcement work (see www.enforcement update.com).

Career

Apex Chambers 2007; 33 Park Place Chambers 2002-2007; Gray’s Inn 2002; Hugh James Solicitors 1996-2002; Solicitors’ Roll 1996.

Member

Captain Scott Society; Cardiff Lawn Tennis Club.

Education

Bishop of Llandaff (Church in Wales) High School; University of Leeds LLB (Hons).

Back to index

Legal Developments worldwide

Legal Developments and updates from the leading lawyers in each jurisdiction. To contribute, send an email request to
  • Abuse of Dominance on Dependent Companies under Turkish Commercial Code

     
  • The Latest Tax Amnesty in Turkey: Law No 6552

    Turkish parliament has enacted the Law No: 6552 that has been promulgated as of September 11, 2014 and provides restructuring for unpaid tax debts and administrative penalties. 
  • Pitfalls in Financing the Renewable Investments in Turkey

    In 2012, OECD has reported that economy-wide transformation will require cumulative investment in green infrastructure in the range of USD 36-42 trillion between 2012 and 2030, i.e. approximately USD 2 trillion or 2% of global GDP per year. Today more less is being invested annually. Therefore, a remarkable investment gaps exist that needs to be addressed.
  • Dominance - Greece 2014

    Overview of the main recent developments addressing issues of abuse of dominance in Greece. Latest application of article 2 of Law 3959/2011 (equivalent to 102 TFEU) by the Hellenic Competition Commission and the Greek courts.  dominance_2014_greece
  • European Antitrust Review - Greece 2014

    Presentation of the Greek legal framework on the protection of free competition (L.3959/2011), which generally follows articles 101, 102 TFEU and the framework of EU Regulation 1/2003. The chapter presents recent law changes, as well as the trends in Greek antitrust practice, together with an overview of the most significant cases brought before the Hellenic Competition Commission and the Greek Courts.  ear_greece_2014
  • Public Competition Enforcement Review - Greece 2014

    Presentation of last year's enforcement by the Hellenic Competition Commission (‘HCC'). A brief overview of the most interesting developments in the area of Greek competition law, including recent antitrust cases examined by the HCC and the Greek courts.  greece_2014
  • Listed stock options and warrants - The Ruling Commission has fixed certain conditions

    The so-called "Ruling Commission" sets the conditions under which listed options enter into the scope of the law of 26 March 1999. This is an important decision regarding the exemption from social security of such options.
  • Land Allocation for Renewable Market in Turkey

    Turkey aims to utilize its energy potential, including renewable sources in a cost-effective manner. Today, Turkey targets the share of renewable resources in electricity generation to be at least 30 % by 2023. To meet this, current incentive mechanism for renewables relies on feed-in tariff mainly in solar and wind power. Numbers of renewable energy projects have been increasing since 2010 in Turkey.  After energy revolution in 2010, remarkable deals have been substantiated in the last years. There have been several projects pending before administrative authorities to be approved. However, numbers of the projects are still not at the desired level. 
  • Procurement Mechanism in Turkish Defense Industry-I

    In the field of defense industry, a new system of governance has been established through the Law#3238 ratified in 1985 in order to realize planning and coordination, taking quick decisions and execution (especially for  imports, exports, modernization, research and development, mutual trade, finance) in the government of highest level. Also the basic aim of law is explained as the development of a modern defense industry and ensuring the modernization of the Turkish Armed Forces.
  • Trade secret - controversies

    Jurisprudence has provided two different decisions in identical case matter, namely the contracting authority's right (or the lack thereof) to disclose information regarded as a trade secret by the economic operator. The regional court in Łódź decided in 2004 that the contracting authority is bound by the economic operator's stipulation regarding confidentiality of some of the information contained in the offer. It may accept it or may reject the offer, but it has no right to disclose it. In 2005 the Supreme Court of the Republic of Poland declared something completely to the contrary in its resolution: the contracting authority has the right to disclose information which does not satisfy statutory conditions of a trade secret. Is the Supreme Court right and does its resolution constitute the final word in this matter? In my opinion, the resolution in fact only raises more doubts.