Go back to News
NEWS
Covid-19 | Statement Gómez-Acebo & Pombo
16 March, 2020
At Gómez-Acebo & Pombo we have implemented specific measures to help overcome the situation created by Covid- 19 whilst ensuring the safety of our teams and of those people with whom we may have contact, we have adopted different internal protocols, including teleworking for the whole Firm.
Rest assured that our activity continues to uphold the quality of our service, while contributing with the adopted measures to prevent the spread of the virus.
We are at your disposal at all times, and you can get in touch with your usual contact person or with us by e-mail at comunicacion@ga-p.com or at the following office telephone numbers:
Madrid (+34) 91 582 91 00
Barcelona (+34) 93 415 74 00
Bilbao (+34) 94 415 70 15
Brussels +32 (0) 2 231 12 20
Lisbon (+351) 21 340 86 00
New York (+1) 646 736 3075
London +44 (0)20 7329 5407
Valencia (+34) 96 351 38 35
Vigo (+34) 986 44 33 80
We hope that everything will be back to normal soon.
Rest assured that our activity continues to uphold the quality of our service, while contributing with the adopted measures to prevent the spread of the virus.
We are at your disposal at all times, and you can get in touch with your usual contact person or with us by e-mail at comunicacion@ga-p.com or at the following office telephone numbers:
Madrid (+34) 91 582 91 00
Barcelona (+34) 93 415 74 00
Bilbao (+34) 94 415 70 15
Brussels +32 (0) 2 231 12 20
Lisbon (+351) 21 340 86 00
New York (+1) 646 736 3075
London +44 (0)20 7329 5407
Valencia (+34) 96 351 38 35
Vigo (+34) 986 44 33 80
We hope that everything will be back to normal soon.
Press contact
Director of Business Development, Marketing and Communications
Director of Business Development, Marketing and Communications
More information about
Gómez-Acebo & Pombo
¡NEW! 
PUBLICATION
¡NEW!
The long arm of the Unified Patent Court based on the "event giving rise to the infringement" and considerations on the application of lex loci protectionis
This paper analyses the decision of the Mannheim Local Division of 2 October 2025, where the Unified Patent Court (UPC) justifies its jurisdiction on the basis of shipment of products from a UPC territory by company listed as authorized representative in the EC and UK markets as event giving rise to damage. Furthermore, although the applicable law with regard to the infringement of the European patent validated in States that are not party to the Agreement on a Unified Patent Court is the national law of those States, with regard to the scope of patent protection, the UPC imposes on the defendant—unduly—the burden of proving the specifics of national law.
¡NEW! 
PUBLICATION
3 days ago
Legal doctrine of the UPC’s Court of Appeal on the patent invalidity defence: is the way in which the ‘long arm’ is applied compatible with the UPC's own Rules of Procedure?
The Court of Appeal of the Unified Patent Court has ruled that a patent invalidity defence cannot be raised before the Unified Patent Court, with only a counterclaim being possible. This calls into question the way in which the ‘long arm’ is being applied with regard to European patents validated in States that are not party to the Agreement on a Unified Patent Court (UPCA), whether or not they are members of the European Union, since no counterclaim for revocation or plea of invalidity as a defence can be filed or raised with regard to such patents. This raises significant doubts about the compatibility of how the ‘long arm’ is applied in the Unified Patent Court system, given its own Rules of Procedure.
3 days ago
PUBLICATION
26 Feb, 2026
A restructuring plan sanctioned in England and Wales that modifies debt subject to German law has no effect in Germany
Recognition of UK restructuring plans remains a contentious issue in the European Union. This decision by the Frankfurt am Main Regional Court is controversial, but it raises questions about the consequences of the application of the rule in Gibbs by the courts of England and Wales in this context.
26 Feb, 2026
PUBLICATION
26 Feb, 2026
Pharma & Healthcare No. 47
The newsletter covers the main developments in Pharma & Healthcare legislation and case law.
26 Feb, 2026
PUBLICATION
23 Feb, 2026
Irregularities in public sector staffing. Jurisdiction and/or substantive law
When a serious irregularity is found in administrative contracts owing to their employment character, jurisdiction lies with the employment branch of the court system. However, if the administrative route is not outside the scope of the law, jurisdiction lies with the judicial review branch of the court system.
23 Feb, 2026
PUBLICATION
17 Feb, 2026
Squeeze-out of minority shareholders following successful mandatory takeover bid: rebuttable presumption of fair consideration
The Court of Justice of the European Union (Fifth Chamber), in its judgment of 27 November 2025 (Case C-567/24, Svema Trade), concerning the equitable price in a squeeze-out requiring minority shareholders to sell their shares to an offeror who, following a mandatory takeover bid, has acquired more than 90% of the capital carrying voting rights in the company subject of the takeover bid, states that the presumption that the price offered in the bid, in the context of such a squeeze-out of holders of securities, is equitable is rebuttable.
17 Feb, 2026
PUBLICATION
13 Feb, 2026
Senior management, membership of the board of directors and insolvency proceedings: single association theory yes, but also employer-employee relationship
Despite classifying the association as a commercial relationship and not an employment relationship, compensation amounts for termination of contract are allowed if they match those accepted by the insolvency practitioners, just as remuneration amounts are allowed if said practitioners had decided to accept remuneration in some months but not in others.
13 Feb, 2026
PUBLICATION
10 Feb, 2026
Application of Austrian law to liability in tort of directors of Maltese company offering online games of chance in Austria
The CJEU clarifies two important issues regarding the application of the Rome II Regulation: the scope of the exception relating to corporate matters and the determination of the place of damage in the case of games of chance offered via the internet from one Member State in another Member State without the licence required in the latter Member State.
10 Feb, 2026
PUBLICATION
09 Feb, 2026
Notarial enforcement of pledges. Is Article 1872 of the Civil Code mandatory? In what sense?
The clause agreed upon must comply, for greater certainty, with the provisions of the new judicial enforcement procedure. It will be necessary to agree on an appraised value, which is not required in Article 1872 CC, because otherwise the award would be similar to a ‘forfeiture proviso’ (pactum commissorium), which the Civil Code neutralised with the drastic imposition of extinguishment of the debt in its entirety.
09 Feb, 2026