Robert O'Donoghue KC KC > Brick Court Chambers > London, England > Barrister Profile
Brick Court Chambers Offices
7-8 ESSEX STREET
LONDON
WC2R 3LD
England
- Set Profile
- Go to...
Robert O'Donoghue KC KC
Position
Mr O’Donoghue’s practice focuses on all aspects of EU and UK competition laws (including international mergers and acquisitions, restrictive practices, abuse of dominance); EU law matters more generally (eg internal market, conflicts of law/forum, challenges to EU legislation, public procurement); and regulatory and public law (in particular utilities regulation). He has frequently appeared before EU and national competition authorities and regulators in respect of these practice areas, as well as in litigation before the EU courts, UK courts, foreign courts and arbitral bodies. Leading cases include: Telefonica O2 & ors v British Telecommunications [2012] EWCA Civ 1002; Asda & ors v Office of Fair Trading [2011] CAT 41; Foundem v Google Inc (abuse of dominance (pending); CEF & EWRG v General Electric UK Ltd & ors (recycling) (settled); PLUS Markets plc v London Stock Exchange plc (Commercial Court); Emerald & ors v British Airways plc [2009] EWHC 741 (Ch), [2011] 2 WLR 203 (CA); Tesco plc v Competition Commission (Competition Appeal Tribunal); iDealing Ltd v London Stock Exchange (High Court); St George’s Healthcare NHS Trust v S [1999] Fam 26 (Court of Appeal); European Climate Exchange v LCH Clearnet Ltd (High Court), Sel-Imperial v British Standards Institution (High Court); Case No 1093/3/3/07 T-Mobile (UK) Ltd v Ofcom Competition Appeal Tribunal); and British Association of Airline Pilots v British Airways plc (High Court); EU cases (Luxembourg): British Airways v Commission (air cargo cartel) (pending); Case T-184/01 R, IMS Health Inc v Commission [2001] ECR 11-3193; Case C-481/01 P(R), NDC Health Corp & NDC Health GmbH & Co KG v IMS Health Inc [2002] 5 CMLR 1; Case C-381/98 Ingmar GB Ltd and Eaton Leonard Technologies Inc [2000] ECR 1-9305; Case C-95/04 P British Airways plc v Commission, judgment of March 17 2007; Case T-15/02 BASF AG v Commission, judgment of March 15 2006.
Career
Qualified 1996, Lincoln’s Inn; internship at telecoms unit of DG Competition (Unit C) of the EU Commission; Brussels and London offices of Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton LLP 1998; Brick Court Chambers 2007.
Languages
French.
Education
LLB; LLM; Bar Vocation Course.
Lawyer Rankings
London Bar > Competition
(Leading Silks)Ranked: Tier 2Robert O’Donoghue KC – Brick Court Chambers ‘A clear, persuasive and powerful advocate with a mastery of competition law. He is a particularly effective cross-examiner, who had the other side’s witnesses reeling from their experience in the box during trial last year.’
Brick Court Chambers continues to handle the leading cases in the field of competition law, advising both claimants and defendants across the spectrum of competition areas, from state aid and cartels to abuse of dominant positions and contested mergers. Mark Hoskins KC leads, among others, Sarah Abram KC, who took silk in 2022, in acting for leading mobile operators, including O2 and Telefonica, in a damages claim brought by Phones4U for around £800m; the retailer collapsed into administration in 2014 alleging that the networks conspired to drive it out of business. Marie Demetriou KC continues to lead Victoria Wakefield KC among others in Merricks v Mastercard, the first collection action certified by the CAT, with more proceedings in 2023 following the success in the Court of Appeal in late 2022 – the case seeks damages for virtually every adult in the UK, who allegedly paid inflated prices owing to the payment network’s interchange fees. In Allergen & Ors v CMA, Robert O’Donoghue KC led Emma Mockford when acting Cinven – previous owner of a business now forming part of Advanz Pharmaceuticals – in its appeal against the regulator’s 2021 decision that drug companies overcharged the NHS for hydrocortisone tablets.
London Bar > IT and telecoms (infrastructure and contracts)
(Leading Silks)Ranked: Tier 4Robert O’Donoghue KC – Brick Court Chambers ‘Excellent all round – sharp intellect, incredibly responsive and always superbly prepared. A very persuasive advocate who is able to think clearly and quickly on his feet. His ability to explain what can be very complex concepts and arguments in a clear, digestible and affable manner is something often appreciated by clients and judges alike, and invariably works to his clients’ advantage.’