• 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)

• "Counsels clients in public and administrative law challenges pursued under EU law. She is especially well versed in challenges involving pharmaceutical regulation, including the authorisation of new drugs. Other recent public law mandates include cases concerning transportation and international sanctions." "Exceptionally bright, collaborative, strategic and commercial. She has excellent industry knowledge in key areas." "She knows the regulatory background very well and is easy to work with. She went down very well with the judge as she was very measured and calm." (Chambers & Partners 2020)
• "She has cultivated a highly respected practice in the field of civil liberties and human rights. She regularly handles an array of high-profile, significant cases, covering areas such as the rights of pregnant workers, state immunity rules and torture allegations. She appears before Employment Tribunals, the High Court and Supreme Court as well as the ECtHR." "She shows great strategic leadership." "Incredibly hard-working and focused." (Chambers & Partners 2020)
• "Knows pharmaceuticals law like the back of her hand" and has "good strategic nous. She works incredibly hard and presents her parts of the case very clearly." "She is very measured and calm in court, which judges respond well to." (Chambers & Partners 2020)
• "Instructed by pharmaceutical companies and public bodies." (The Legal 500 2020)
• "A measured advocate who is good on public law." (The Legal 500 2020)
• "She has a track record of FRAND and pharma cases." (The Legal 500 2020)
• "Instructed on pharmaceutical and chemical matters." (The Legal 500 2020)
• 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