Aqeel Kadri is a member of the competition law and dispute resolution practices at White & Case. He was called to the Bar of England and Wales in 2009 and admitted to the roll of solicitors in 2013. Aqeel advises and represents clients in a range of competition and State aid matters; his experience includes working for clients in the energy, pharmaceutical, and digital business sectors.
Aqeel's main focus is on contentious matters. He has experience of representing clients before the EU General Court and Court of Justice in claims relating to cartel infringements (Airfreight, Bathroom Fittings, Cathode Ray Tubes, Gas-insulated Switchgear) and in abuse of dominance investigations by the European Commission and Competition & Markets Authority. Aqeel has acted for and advised clients in relation to rebates, tying, refusal to supply and excessive pricing.
Aqeel has also advised clients in relation to follow-on damages actions before the courts of various EU Member States, including the High Court and Competition Appeal Tribunal.
Aqeel also advises on a range of State aid matters and represents the Applicants in the landmark State aid cases of European Food v Commission and Micula v Commission before the EU General Court, and in related proceedings in the High Court.
Before qualifying as a lawyer Aqeel spent several years working in the IT industry.
Representing Bulgarian Energy Holding in an ongoing investigation by the European Commission into an alleged abuse of a dominant position.
Representing a supplier of medical equipment in a CMA investigation into alleged tying; which ended with the case being closed.
Representing Defendants in current claims for damages in the High Court and Competition Appeal Tribunal arising out of the European Commission decisions in Power cables and Automotive bearings.
Representing SAS in its challenge to the Commission's re-adopted decision with respect to the airfreight cartel and was part of the team which secured the annulment of the original European Commission Decision before the EU General Court.
Representing the beneficiaries of alleged State aid arising out of an arbitral award rendered under the auspices of the ICSID Convention, seeking the annulment of a European Commission State aid Decision blocking payment of damages awarded to the Claimants. Aqeel also represents four of the Claimants in proceedings before the English Courts for enforcement of the arbitral award (Micula & Others v Romania  EWHC 31 (Comm)).
Representing Toshiba in its appeal to the ECJ against the finding of the General Court that Toshiba was liable for the conduct of a joint venture in which it was a partner.
Micula and Others v Romania  EWHC 31 (Comm) - Case Annotation, European State Aid Law Quarterly Volume 16, Issue 2 (2017), pp. 316 – 321, (co-author, with Kai Struckmann, Genevra Forwood and Adam Wallin)
It's becoming harder for parents to escape liability, Competition Law Insight, 6 June 2017, (co-author, with Marc Israel and Jacquelyn MacLennan)
Toshiba v Commission: Court of Justice Eases Burden on Commission to Fine Parent Companies for Competition Law Infringements by Joint Ventures, Journal of European Competition law & Practice, 2017, Vol. 8, No. 4, (co-author, with Jacquelyn MacLennan)
Toshiba v. Commission – How (not) to Prove Awareness, and Decisively Influence People, Competition Policy International, August 2016, (co-author, with Jacquelyn MacLennan)