• Nokia V Apple (FRAND and competition law issues)
• Pfizer and Flynn Pharma v CMA [2017] CAT 7 (acting for British Generics Manufacturers Association seeking to intervene)
• Acting for group of retailers in Visa and Mastercard Litigation
• Regular advice to National Associate of Credit Hire Operators
• Acting for company in relation to CMA investigation into alleged excessive pricing of pharmaceuticals
• Ericsson v Apple (FRAND and competition law issues)
• Unwired Planet v Samsung, Google and Huawei (FRAND and competition law issues)
• Arriva v Luton Airport  [2014] EWHC 64 (Ch) (dominance of airport operator and bus services; instructed for appeal; settled)
• Nokia v Sierra Wireless SA (arbitration)
• Nokia v HTC (FRAND and competition law issues)
• Philips v Amino [2008] EWHC 2604 (Pat) (patent and competition law claim concerning set-top boxes)
• Ericsson v Samsung [2007] EWHC 1047 (Pat) (licensing of patents on fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory terms)
• Independent Media Support Ltd -v- Ofcom, Red Bee Media Ltd and BBC [2008] CAT 13
• Phonographic Performance Ltd v DTI & AG [2004] 1 WLR 2893 (Ch Div.) (limitation periods and abuse of process in EU damages claim)
• Case C-245/00 SENA v NOS (ECJ) [2003] ECR I-1251 (rental and lending rights)

• R (CAAT) v Sec. of State for International Trade (legality of arms sales to Saudi Arabia)
• R (Bayer) v 12 CCGs (legality of policy preferring use of unlicensed medicine for treatment of wet AMD)
• R (Teva) v Sec. of State for Health & Biogen (binding nature of recital to Commission Decision and global marketing authorisation concept – Tecfidera)
• BMS v NICE (funding of cancer drug dasatinib)
• R (Luton and ors) v Sec. of State for Education (Building Schools for the Future)
• R (Philip Morris and ors) v Sec. of State for Health (tobacco display ban)
• Celgene v NICE June 2010 (availability of rare cancer drug)
• AE, AF and AN v Secretary of State for the Home Department (HL) The Times 11 June 2009 (fairness of control order hearings)
• R (Gentle and Clarke) v The Prime Minister and ors (HL) [2008] 2 WLR 879 (whether Art 2 ECHR requires an inquiry into the legality of the war in Iraq)
• Jones v Saudi Arabia and ors.; Mitchell v Al-Dali and ors. (HL) [2006] 2 WLR 1424 (operation of state immunity in civil proceedings alleging torture)
• Council for Regulation of Healthcare Professionals v GMC and Prof. Southall (Admin Ct) [2005] EWHC 579 (Admin) (appeal against professor of paediatrics arising out of Sally Clarke case)
• CRHP v GMC and Basiouny (Admin Ct) The Times 7 February 2005 (developed legal test for undue leniency appeals)
• CRHP v GMC and Leeper (Admin Ct) The Times 1 September 2004 (undue leniency appeal)
• CHRP v GMC and Ruscillo (Admin Ct and Court of Appeal) [2004] 1 WLR 2068 [2005] 1 WLR 717 (first appeal under 2002 Act concerning serious professional misconduct charges against doctor)
• CRHP v GMC and Solanke [2004] 1 WLR 2432 (set legal test for undue leniency appeals in healthcare field)
• R (T-Mobile and ors.) v Competition Commission and ors. (High Court) [2003] All ER (D) 377 (regulation of mobile phone termination charges)
• R (CND) v Prime Minister and ors. (Div. Ct) [2002] All ER (D) 245 (declaration sought concerning UN Resolution on Iraq)
• R (Smeaton) v Secretary of State for Health and ors [2002] 2 FLR 146, The Times 2 May 2002 ("morning after pill" case)
• R v The Department of Health, ex parte Source Informatics Ltd (CA) [2001] QB 424, [2000] EuLR 397, [2000] 1 All ER 786, The Times 18 January 2000 (use of anonymised patient information)

• R (Bayer) v 12 CCGs (legality of policy preferring use of unlicensed medicine for treatment of wet AMD)
• R (Teva) v Sec. of State for Health & Biogen (binding nature of recital to Commission Decision and global marketing authorisation concept – Tecfidera)
• Case T-729/15 MSD Animal Health v EMA (access to pharmaceutical documents held by EU - Bravecto)
• Teva v Novartis (Patent Court claim concerning SPC and Paediatric Regulation – Imatinib)
• Accord v Astellas (legality of reliance on German reference product - bendamustine)
• Pfizer (Lyrica/Pregabalin) (public law aspects of second medical use patent)
• Case T-67/13 Novartis v Commission (data exclusivity for cancer drug – Aclasta)
• Case C-477/11 P Sepracor v Commission (admissibility of challenge to decision about new active substance status – eszopiclone)
• Case C-130/11 Neurim Pharmaceuticals (SPC)
• R v Patel & Hussain (CA) [2010] 1 WLR 1011 (whether counterfeit viagra placed on the market in the UK)
• Case C-527/07 Generics (ECJ) 18 June 2009 (meaning of 'reference medicinal product' - galantamine)
• Case C-421/07 Damgaard (ECJ) 2 April 2009 (advertising of pharmaceuticals)
• Case C-452/06 Synthon (ECJ) 16 October 2008 (mutual recognition of pharmaceuticals)
• Case C-106/01 R v MCA, ex parte Novartis (High Court, CA and ECJ) [2004] ECR I-4403 (pharmaceutical marketing authorisations)
• Case C-94/98 R v MCA, ex parte RPR (High Court and ECJ) [1998] EuLR 127, [1998] EuLR 181, [1999] ECR I-8789 (parallel imports of pharmaceuticals and test for injunction)
• Case C-368/96 R v MCA, ex parte Generics (ECJ) [1998] ECR I-7967 (pharmaceutical marketing authorisations)

• Multiple pieces of advice to FCA about implementation of EU financial services legislation
• Advice to banks on implications of EU financial services legislation
• Case C-270/12 UK v Parliament and Council (challenge to Short Selling Regulation)
• OFT v Abbey National and ors (Commercial Court, CA and Supreme Court), [2009] UKSC 6 (test case concerning unauthorised overdraft charges)
• Poole and ors. v HM Treasury (Commercial Court and CA) The Times 1.12.06 (Group Litigation concerning Lloyd's Names)

• Case C-15/10 Etimine v Sec. of State for Work and Pensions & Borax (regulation of chemicals)
• Case C-343/09 Afton Chemical (ECJ) 8 July 2010 (legality of ban on fuel additive)

• R (CAAT) v Sec. of State for International Trade (legality of arms sales to Saudi Arabia)
• Bancoult v UK (ECtHR) (intervening for Human Rights Watch and MRG in Chagos Islanders case)
• Jones v UK (ECtHR) (state immunity and torture)
• LR v UK (ECtHR) (human trafficking)
• AE, AF and AN v Secretary of State for the Home Department (HL) The Times 11 June 2009 (fairness of control order hearings)
• RP v UK (ECtHR) (fairness of role of Official Solicitor in child care proceedings)
• R.K. and A.K. v United Kingdom (ECtHR) (30.09.08) (Strasbourg cases arising out of HL judgment in D v East Berkshire)
• R (Gentle and Clarke) v The Prime Minister and ors (HL) [2008] 2 WLR 879 (whether Art 2 ECHR requires an inquiry into the legality of the war in Iraq)
• Entico v UNESCO [2008] EWHC 531 (immunity of UNESCO and Article 6 ECHR)
• Association SOS Attentats and anor. v France (ECtHR) (25.10.06) (Intervention for UK in case concerning state immunity and Libyan terrorist attack)
• Grant v UK (ECtHR) (23 May 2006) (rights of a transexual)
• R (Hooper and ors) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (High Court, Court of Appeal and House of Lords) [2002] UKHRR 785, The Times 28 June 2003, [2003] 3 All ER 673, [2003] 1 WLR 2623, [2005] 1 WLR 1681 (test cases concerning widows' benefits under the Human Rights Act 1998)
• Bullerwell v UK (ECtHR) 12 December 2002 (length of proceedings)
• Roche v UK (ECtHR) The Times, October 27, 2005 (testing at Porton Down of mustard gas and nerve agent; violation of Article 8 found due to failure to provide information)
• Z v UK (ECtHR) (2002) 34 EHRR 3, The Times 31 May 2001; TP & KM -v- UK (ECtHR) The Times 31 May 2001 (right to a fair hearing and claims in tort against public authorities - overturned Osman v UK)
• Kingsley v United Kingdom (EctHR) (2002) 33 EHRR 13,The Times 9 January 2001 and Grand Chamber Judgment, 28 May 2002 (independent and impartial tribunal and leading judgment on just satisfaction in Article 6 cases)
• Stefan v UK (ECHR) (1997) 25 EHRR CD 130 (GMC Health Committee proceedings not contrary to Art. 6)

• Extensive advice to FCA on compatibility of proposed consumer protection measures with EU law
• OFT v Abbey National and ors (Commercial Court, CA and Supreme Court), [2009] UKSC 6 (test case concerning unauthorised overdraft charges)

• Case C-146 & 147/13 Spain v Counsel (challenge to the Unified Patent Convention)
• Case C-15/10 Etimine v Sec. of State for Work and Pensions & Borax (regulation of chemicals)
• Joined Cases C-483/09 and C-1/10 Gueye and Sanchez (standing of victims in criminal proceedings)
• Case C-240/09 Lesoochranarske (ECJ) 8 March 2011 (status of mixed agreement, the Arhus Convention, in EU law)
• Case C-343/09 Afton Chemical (ECJ) 8 July 2010 (legality of ban on fuel additive)
• Case C-555/07 Kucukdeveci (ECJ) 19 January 2010 (age discrimination and horizontal direct effect)
• Case T-246/08 Melli Bank plc v Council (CFI) 9 July 2009 (Iranian sanctions)
• Case C-345/06 Heinrich (ECJ) 10 March 2009 (legality of secret annex to regulation)
• Joined Cases C-585/08 and C-144/09 Pammer and Hotel Alpenhof (Brussels Regulation)
• Case C-524/06 Huber (ECJ) 16 December 2008 (data processing in state register of foreign nationals)
• Joined Cases C-39/05 P and C-52/05 P Sweden and Turco v Council (CFI and ECJ) The Times, 27.7.08 (access to legal opinion)
• Spencer v Sec. of State for Work and Pensions; Moore v Sec. of State for Transport (CA) [2009] 2 WLR 593 (compatibility of limitation period with principle of equivalence)
• Byrne v Sec. of State for Transport and MIB (CA) [2008] 3 WLR 1421 (Francovich damages claim)
• Case C-64/05 P IFAW (ECJ), The Times 11.1.08 (access to Member State documents)
• Case C-112/03 SFIP (ECJ) [2005] ECR I-3707 (Brussels Convention)
• Case C-491/01 R (Imperial Tobacco and ors) v Secretary of State for Health (ECJ) [2002] ECR I-11453 (legal base for Directive)
• Ingmar Ltd v Eaton Leonard Inc (QBD) [2001] EuLR 755 (approach to calculation of compensation under the Commercial Agents Regulations)
• Tamarind International Ltd and others v Eastern Natural Gas (Retail) Ltd and another (Commercial Court) [2000] CLC 1397, The Times 12 June 2000 (applicability of Commercial Agents Regulations to gas and electricity sales agents)
• Case C-101/01 Bodil Lindqvist (ECJ) [2003] ECR I- 12971 (first case on Data Protection Directive before ECJ)
• R (Lambiris) v Specialist Training Authority (High Court) [2002] All ER (D) 503, [2002] EuLR 591 (CA) 8 May 2003 (recognition of specialist medical qualifications)
• R v Secretary of State for Trade and Industry and ors, ex parte Imperial Tobacco & ors (Admin Ct) The Times 29 October 1999; (CA) [2002] QB 161, [2000] 1 AllER 572, The Times 17 December 1999; (HL) [2001] 1 WLR 127, The Times 20 December 2000; (ECJ) The Times 10 October 2000 (lack of competence for Directive and power of domestic courts to grant injunction)
• Case C-507/12 Jessy St Prix v Sec. State for Work and Pensions (rights of pregnant women to retain ‘worker’ status)
• Case C-403/08 Football Association Premier League (ECJ) (free movement of satellite decoder cards)
• Case C-1/05 Jia (ECJ) [2007] ECR I-0001 (free movement rights and right to residence)
• Foulser v Macdougall (HMIT) [2007] EWCA Civ 8 (High Court and CA) (freedom of establishment and tax avoidance scheme)
• Case C - 374/04 Test Claimants in Class IV of the ACT Group Litigation (ECJ) [2006] ECR I-11673 (freedom of establishment and dividends)
• Case C-208/00 Uberseering v NCC Nordic Construction (ECJ) [2002] ECR I- 9919 (freedom of establishment for companies)

• Numerous pieces of advice for GMC on implications of EU free movement law
• Council for Regulation of Healthcare Professionals v GMC and Prof. Southall (Admin Ct) [2005] EWHC 579 (Admin) (appeal against professor of paediatrics arising out of Sally Clarke case)
• CRHP v GMC and Basiouny (Admin Ct) The Times 7 February 2005 (developed legal test for undue leniency appeals)
• CRHP v GMC and Leeper (Admin Ct) The Times 1 September 2004 (undue leniency appeal)
• CHRP v GMC and Ruscillo (Admin Ct and Court of Appeal) [2004] 1 WLR 2068 [2005] 1 WLR 717 (first appeal under 2002 Act concerning serious professional misconduct charges against doctor)
• CRHP v GMC and Solanke [2004] 1 WLR 2432 (set legal test for undue leniency appeals in healthcare field)

• Nokia v Apple (FRAND and competition law issues)
• Ericsson v Apple (FRAND and competition law issues)
• Unwired Planet v Samsung, Google and Huawei (FRAND and competition law issues)
• Nokia v Sierra Wireless SA (arbitration)
• Nokia v HTC (FRAND and competition law issues)
• Philips v Amino [2008] EWHC 2604 (Pat) (patent and competition law claim concerning set-top boxes)
• Ericsson v Samsung [2007] EWHC 1047 (Pat) (licensing of patents on fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory terms)
• Joined Cases C-509/09 and C-161/10 eDate Advertising GmbH (E-Commerce Directive)
• Independent Media Support Ltd -v- Ofcom, Red Bee Media Ltd and BBC [2008] CAT 13
• Phonographic Performance Ltd v DTI & AG [2004] 1 WLR 2893 (Ch Div.) (limitation periods and abuse of process in EU damages claim)
• Case C-245/00 SENA v NOS (ECJ) [2003] ECR I-1251 (rental and lending rights)

• Nokia v Apple (FRAND and competition law issues)
• Ericsson v Apple (FRAND and competition law issues)
• Unwired Planet v Samsung, Google and Huawei (FRAND and competition law issues)
• Nokia v Sierra Wireless SA (arbitration)
• Nokia v HTC (FRAND and competition law issues)
• Philips v Amino [2008] EWHC 2604 (Pat) (patent and competition law claim concerning set-top boxes)
• Ericsson v Samsung [2007] EWHC 1047 (Pat) (licensing of patents on fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory terms)

• Case C-403/08 Football Association Premier League (ECJ) (free movement of satellite decoder cards)
• Case C-146/13 Spain v Parliament and Council (legality of Unified Patent Court)
• Joined Cases C-509/09 and C-161/10 eDate Advertising GmbH (E-Commerce Directive)
• Independent Media Support Ltd -v- Ofcom, Red Bee Media Ltd and BBC [2008] CAT 13
• Phonographic Performance Ltd v DTI & AG [2004] 1 WLR 2893 (Ch Div.) (limitation periods and abuse of process in EU damages claim)
• Case C-245/00 SENA v NOS (ECJ) [2003] ECR I-1251 (rental and lending rights)

• Joined Cases C-585/08 and C-144/09 Pammer and Hotel Alpenhof (Brussels Regulation)
• Case C-112/03 SFIP (ECJ) [2005] ECR I-3707 (Brussels Convention)

• Council for Regulation of Healthcare Professionals v GMC and Prof. Southall (Admin Ct) [2005] EWHC 579 (Admin) (appeal against professor of paediatrics arising out of Sally Clarke case)
• CRHP v GMC and Basiouny (Admin Ct) The Times 7 February 2005 (developed legal test for undue leniency appeals)
• CRHP v GMC and Leeper (Admin Ct) The Times 1 September 2004 (undue leniency appeal)
• CHRP v GMC and Ruscillo (Admin Ct and Court of Appeal) [2004] 1 WLR 2068 [2005] 1 WLR 717 (first appeal under 2002 Act concerning serious professional misconduct charges against doctor)
• CRHP v GMC and Solanke [2004] 1 WLR 2432 (set legal test for undue leniency appeals in healthcare field)

• Jones v UK (ECtHR) (state immunity and torture)
• Advising US Government on State immunity and human rights issues including in context of employment law claims
• Advising International Organisations on State immunity issues
• Entico v UNESCO [2008] EWHC 531 (immunity of UNESCO and Article 6 ECHR)
• Association SOS Attentats and anor. v France (ECtHR) (25.10.06) (Intervention for UK in case concerning state immunity and Libyan terrorist attack)
• Case C-240/09 Lesoochranarske (ECJ) 8 March 2011 (status of mixed agreement, the Arhus Convention, in EU law)

• Case T-246/08 Melli Bank plc v Council (CFI) 9 July 2009 (Iranian sanctions)

• Foulser v Macdougall (HMIT) [2007] EWCA Civ 8 (High Court and CA) (freedom of establishment and tax avoidance scheme)
• Case C - 374/04 Test Claimants in Class IV of the ACT Group Litigation (ECJ) [2006] ECR I-11673 (freedom of establishment and dividends)
• Case C-208/00 Uberseering v NCC Nordic Construction (ECJ) [2002] ECR I- 9919 (freedom of establishment for companies)

• Instructed by BT and Openreach in multiple matters over many years including e.g. Fixed Access Market Review and Charge Controls
• Nokia v Apple (FRAND and competition law issues)
• Ericsson v Apple (FRAND and competition law issues)
• Unwired Planet v Samsung, Google and Huawei (FRAND and competition law issues)
• Nokia v Sierra Wireless SA (arbitration)
• Nokia v HTC (FRAND and competition law issues)
• Philips v Amino [2008] EWHC 2604 (Pat) (patent and competition law claim concerning set-top boxes)
• Ericsson v Samsung [2007] EWHC 1047 (Pat) (licensing of patents on fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory terms)
• R (T-Mobile and ors.) v Competition Commission and ors. (High Court) [2003] All ER (D) 377 (regulation of mobile phone termination charges)

• Spencer v Sec. of State for Work and Pensions; Moore v Sec. of State for Transport (CA) [2009] 2 WLR 593 (compatibility of limitation period with principle of equivalence)
• Byrne v Sec. of State for Transport and MIB (CA) [2008] 3 WLR 1421 (Francovich damages claim)

Degree

BA (New College Oxford, Modern History First Class); Dip Law (City University, with Distinction)

Lectures/Seminars

Lecturer on European and competition law (King's College, London, Hart Publishing, Lexis-Nexis and Slynn Foundation); human rights (Foreign Office, Council of Europe and JUSTICE/Sweet & Maxwell); judicial review (Public Law Project, Lexis-Nexis).

Further Information

Member of JUSTICE (Council), ALBA, Bar Human Rights Committee, COMBAR, Bar European Group, European Circuit of the Bar of England and Wales, Bar Pro Bono Unit, Liberty

Languages: good French; basic German

Consistently recommended in sections on EU/Competition law, administrative and public law, and civil liberties and human rights by Chambers and Partners and Legal 500. Recommended as stand-out barrister in life sciences section of Who’s Who Legal.

Contributor to "Competition Litigation: UK Practice and Procedure" (OUP, 2010)

Author of "Striking the Balance: Privacy v Freedom of Expression under the European Convention on Human Rights", published in "Developing Key Privacy Rights" (Hart, 2002)

Co-author of "Competition: Understanding the 1998 Act" (Palladian, 1999)

• Jemima Stratford QC is a highly experienced and impressive barrister who regularly represents clients in highly technical pharma and chemical cases. She has expertise representing clients both domestically and internationally. (Who's Who Legal - UK Bar: Life Sciences 2019)
• "Very clever and someone whose written work is beautiful." "She has good strategic nous." (Chambers & Partners 2019)
• "She is exceptionally able, extremely personable and a delight to deal with." (Chambers & Partners 2019)
• "Very responsive and has a client-focused approach." (Chambers & Partners UK & Global 2019)
• "She is a very impressive and strategically sound silk." (Chambers & Partners 2019)
• "A measured advocate with strong EU and public law skills and sector knowledge." (The Legal 500 2018-19)
• "Always prepared to argue difficult cases." (The Legal 500 2018-19)
• "Thinks carefully about the issues and a good team player. Top-level experience of SEP/FRAND issues." (The Legal 500 2018-19)
• "Practical, calm, thoughtful, and a good team player." (The Legal 500 2018-19)
• The “outstanding” Jemima Stratford QC is “a top silk” who is highly recommended thanks to her strong technical expertise and superb style of delivery. (Who's Who Legal 2018 - Life Sciences)
• "Very methodical, easy to work with and very clear drafting." (Chambers & Partners 2018)
• "She is supremely clever and as sharp as a knife." (Chambers & Partners 2018)
• "We found Jemima to be extremely easy to work with, and we value her thorough and thoughtful advice." (Chambers & Partners 2018)
• "She is very responsive, commercial and pragmatic and she can see things other people would miss." (Chambers & Partners 2018)
• "Absolutely first-rate." (The Legal 500 2017)
• "A fearless advocate, who is always prepared to take difficult points." (The Legal 500 2017)
• "A very clear thinker, who is easy to work with and delivers thoughtful advice." (The Legal 500 2017)
• "Simply terrific." (The Legal 500 2017)
• "Jemima has excellent judgement, is very responsive, highly proactive and incredibly hard-working." (Chambers & Partners 2017)
• "She is able to cut through a lot of dry and academic material with ease and is extremely user-friendly." (Chambers & Partners 2017)
• "She is extremely hard-working and never misses deadlines. She is always well prepared for any case and her advice is very measured and thorough." (Chambers & Partners 2017)
• "She is a very capable leader of a team and gives good direction." (Chambers & Partners 2017)
• "Extremely knowledgeable and passionate." (The Legal 500 2016)
• "Brings real depth to her submissions while keeping judges firmly on board." (The Legal 500 2016)
• "A client-friendly silk with superb analytical skills." (The Legal 500 2016)
• "She is phenomenal - really thorough, personable and a brilliant advocate. She can relate well to her clients and they have full confidence in her." (Chambers & Partners 2016)
• "I have never known her to be less than 110% prepared. She is very thoughtful and succinct and always goes out of her way to help." (Chambers & Partners 2016)
• "Very clever and a great strategist." She is "fantastically knowledgeable." (Chambers & Partners 2016)
• "Absolutely excellent; she is very knowledgeable in a wide range of EU law matters because she does the human side of EU law as well." (Chambers & Partners 2016)
• "Jemima has depth of knowledge and she's a very clear advocate, particularly in European courts." "She is known for being intellectually strong." (Chambers & Partners 2016)
• ‘Extremely knowledgeable and passionate.’ (The Legal 500 2015)
• ‘A strong advocate; thorough and good with clients.’ (The Legal 500 2015)
• ‘Extremely competent and calm.’ (The Legal 500 2015)
• "She is excellent, and charming with it." (Chambers & Partners 2015)
• "She has very strong, clear and accessible ideas, and the ability to boil things down to the nub without making you feel stupid." (Chambers & Partners 2015)
• "Impressive, thorough and down to earth. She's a good team player." (Chambers & Partners 2015)
• "An extremely talented and dedicated lawyer, and a fount of all knowledge on EU law and regulations." (Chambers & Partners 2015)

French, basic German