Kassie Smith KC is a leading specialist in competition litigation. She acts for private clients and regulators in damages actions, JR challenges and infringement appeals. She is also regularly instructed in international arbitrations involving competition and regulatory issues and in matters at the interface of IP and competition law. She is described as “a leader in the competition law field”, “brilliant on her feet” and “a delight to work with”.

Cases

Damages

Kassie has been involved in many damages actions in the CAT, acting for both claimants and defendants, including most recently:

• Interchange fees: acting for the two leading sets of claimants in the multilateral interchange fee proceedings at various hearings before the CAT and the Court of Appeal: see, for example, Dune Group Ltd v Visa Europe Ltd [2022] EWCA Civ 1278, [2021] CAT 35 (application for summary judgment); Merricks v Mastercard and MIF Umbrella Proceedings [2022] CAT 31 (on pass-on); Dune Group Ltd and others v Mastercard and others [2022] CAT 14 (case management); Westover Group and others v Mastercard and others [2021] CAT 12 (on the applicable law under Rome II); and Dune Shoes Ireland Ltd and others v Visa and others [2020] CAT 26 (on Visa’s application for a reference to the CJEU).
• Football betting data: acting for Football Data Co (the Premier League’s data rights company) in a claim brought by Sportradar alleging breach of Arts. 101 and 102 TFEU arising from the grant by FDC to Betgenius of a long-term exclusive right to collect and collate data from football stadia for supply to bookmakers who offer live or “in-play” betting. The dispute settled in October 2022 on the third day of the six-week hearing before the CAT.
• ATM charges: acting for Euronet, operators of ATMs, in a competition law dispute with Mastercard and Visa about their rules for the use of ATMs to access cash in Poland, the Czech Republic and Greece. The case raised issues under Art. 101 TFEU and under Greek, Polish and Czech law.  The proceedings settled shortly before the start of a 12-week trial in October 2023.

Other damages cases in which Kassie has been involved include:

• Power cables (NGET v Safran and others)
• Air cargo (Emerald Supplies v British Airways plc)
• LCD screens (Beko v Samsung and others; TomTom v Samsung and others)
• Carbon graphite (Deutsche Bahn v Morgan Crucible)
• LIBOR (Guardian Care Homes v Barclays)
• Synthetic rubber (Dow v ENI SpA)
• Copper tubes (KME v Toshiba and others)

CAT appeals

Kassie has acted in many appeals to the Competition Appeal Tribunal over the years, including:

• Socrates Training Ltd v Law Society of England and Wales [2017] CAT 10: first case under the fast-track procedure in the CAT raising issues of abusive tying practices.
• Tesco v OFT [2012] CAT 31: four-week CAT appeal re price fixing on cheese.
• Galliford Try v OFT [2011] CAT 7: appeal against the OFT’s penalty decision on construction cover pricing.
• National Grid plc v Ofgem [2010] EWCA Civ 114: breach of the Chapter II prohibition in the gas metering market.
• Argos and Littlewoods v OFT [2006] EWCA Civ 1318: ‘hub and spoke’ price fixing cartel on toys.
• James E McCabe Ltd v Scottish Courage Ltd [2006] EWHC 538 (Comm): restrictive covenants and competition law.
• Pernod Ricard and Campbell Distillers v OFT [2005] CAT 9, [2004] CAT 10: procedural issues including what constitutes an appealable decision and complainants’ rights.
• JJ Burgess v OFT [2005] CAT 25: refusal to supply under the Chapter II prohibition.
• IIB & ABTA v Director General of Fair Trading (2001) Comp AR 62: the first case to be heard by the CAT under the Competition Act 1998.
• Director General of Fair Trading v PAGB and PATA [2001] 1 WLR 700 (“Medicaments”): resulted in the abolition of resale price maintenance on over-the-counter medicines.

Mergers and market investigations

Kassie has advised and acted in many merger and market investigation cases (for both private parties and regulators) including:

• Tobii v Competition and Markets Authority [2020] CAT 1: appeal in digital merger of two AAC solutions companies.
• Fox/ Sky merger: advising DCMS on competition and media plurality issues.
• Federation of Independent Practitioner Organisations v Competition and Markets Authority [2016] EWCA Civ 777, [2015] CAT 8: appeal on various issues arising from the CMA’s private healthcare investigation.
• AXA PPP v Competition and Markets Authority [2015] EWCA Civ 492, [2014] CAT 23: appeals against the CMA’s private healthcare divestment decisions.
• Skyscanner v Competition and Markets Authority [2014] CAT 16: successful challenge to CMA’s decision to accept commitments in its investigation into price fixing in hotel online bookings.
• Advising on issues arising from the CC’s investigation into the audit market.
• HCA International Limited v Competition and Markets Authority [2014] CAT 11; [2014] CAT 10: issues of expert evidence and disclosure arising in appeals against the CMA’s private healthcare divestment decisions.
• BMI Healthcare v Competition Commission [2013] CAT 24: disclosure issues in the CC’s ongoing investigation into private healthcare.
• Acting for OFT in payday lending market investigation.
• Stagecoach v Competition Commission [2010] CAT 14: bus company merger.
• Barclays Bank plc v Competition Commission [2009] CAT 27: market investigation into payment protection insurance (PPI).
• Tesco plc v Competition Commission [2009] CAT 6: challenge to the Commission’s imposition of the “competition test” on Tesco following its investigation into the groceries’ market.

Arbitration and other international

Kassie recently acted for a large mobile telephone manufacturer in an international arbitration in Stockholm claiming in excess of £400 million for breaches of Article 102 TFEU, involving excessive pricing and discrimination, and/or breach of the obligation to charge FRAND royalties for the licensing for standard essential patents.  The proceedings settled shortly before a four-week arbitration hearing in spring/ summer 2023.

From 2016 to 2019, Kassie also acted in a number of lengthy and high value arbitration hearings in Stockholm representing subsidiaries of a Russian State owned gas company in cases relating to the transit of natural gas to Europe and raising issues of EU competition and energy law. She has also acted herself as an expert on EU competition law in arbitration proceedings.

Kassie is on the panel of counsel for the Hong Kong Competition Commission and has recently been advising the Commission on the first case brought under its leniency regime. She is acting for the HKCC in a case on price fixing of school textbooks, which is listed to be heard by the Hong Kong Competition Tribunal in spring 2024. She has also advised private parties in Hong Kong on Commission investigations and issues arising under the HK Competition Ordinance.

She has advised clients in Guernsey and Jersey on competition and regulatory issues under Guernsey and Jersey law. In 2018, she was appointed by the States of Jersey to carry out an independent review of the Jersey Competition and Regulatory Authority (JCRA) following the Royal Court judgment in ATF Overseas Holdings Ltd v JCRA.

Between 2008 and 2010, she appeared for Cable and Wireless in various proceedings before the Eastern Caribbean Court of Appeal challenging decisions of the telecoms regulator in BVI.

Kassie is recognized as a Tier 1 leading specialist in telecoms matters.  The directories say that “Kassie is a calm and effective lead counsel who is very smart and user-friendly” and “Kassie is unflappable, pragmatic and holds the court’s attention.”

She has acted in a number of cases before the High Court and the CAT on telecoms issues, in particular, cases raising issues about the impact of competition law on standard essential patents (SEPs) for mobile phone technology.  Most recently, Kassie has:

• Acted for OPPO in its FRAND dispute with Nokia before the Patent Court as regards whether Nokia’s refusal to be bound by the FRAND judgment of the Chongqing court and instead to insist on a global licence being set by the English court was FRAND and/or in breach of Art 102 TFEU (Trial E): see Nokia Technologies Oy v Oneplus Technology (Shenzen) Co Ltd [2023] EWHC 1912 (Pat).
• Acted for a large mobile telephone manufacturer in an international arbitration in Stockholm claiming in excess of £400 million for breaches of Art 102 TFEU, involving excessive pricing and discrimination, and/or breach of the obligation to charge FRAND royalties for the licensing for standard essential patents. The proceedings settled shortly before a four-week arbitration hearing in spring/ summer 2023.
• Acted for Apple in its dispute with Optis (a holder of patents on a portfolio of SEPs) as regards what constitutes a FRAND licence for that portfolio. The case also raised issues of abusive conduct in breach of Art 102 TFEU. The case was heard in a five-week trial in the Patent Court in the summer of 2022 and Apple was largely successful in its arguments as to the appropriate FRAND rate: see Optis Cellular Technology LLC v Apple Retail UK Ltd [2023] EWHC 1095 (Ch).

Other telecoms cases include:

• Unwired Planet International Ltd v Huawei Technologies Co Ltd [2015] EWHC 3422 (Pat): standard essential patents and mobile phone technology. Case raising issues about the interaction of IP and competition law.
• Acting for LIME BVI in several judicial review challenges to British Virgin Islands telecoms regulator.
• IPCom v Nokia and HTC [2013] EWHC 407, [2013] EWHC 1178: mobile telephony standard essential patents and FRAND.
• BT & EE v Ofcom [2011] CAT 24: dispute over BT’s mobile phone termination charges.
• C-190/06 Belgacom Mobile v Institut Belge des Services Postaux et des Telecommunications: Community rules on allocation of the radio spectrum to mobile network operators.
• Hutchison (3G) Ltd v Ofcom [2005] CAT 39: Ofcom’s designation of “3” as having significant market power (SMP) in the market for mobile voice call termination on its network.
• BT v Ofcom [2004] CAT 8: the first appeal to the CAT under the Communications Act 2003 re the Interconnection Directive and Radio Base Station (RBS) backhaul circuits.

Utilities

Kassie has extensive experience of regulation of the electricity, gas and water industries. She has acted for and advised both regulated companies and regulators on issues arising from the electricity Retail Price Cap; the “suppliers of last resort” (SoLR) regime; embedded generation; Ofgem’s Transmission Charging Review; transmission charging; renewables obligations; the Third Energy Package; electricity trading arrangements in Great Britain; on electricity distribution losses, and on the RIIO and RIIO2 price controls. She has also acted for Ofwat on a number of matters and advised regulated water companies. Cases include:

• R (on the application of SSE Generation Ltd) v Gas and Electricity Markets Authority (GEMA) [2022] EWCA Civ 1472: successfully defending Ofgem in a challenge to its approach to generator transmission charges under EU retained legislation before the CMA, Admin Court and Court of Appeal.
• R (on the application of Peak Gen Top Co Ltd) v Gas and Electricity Markets Authority [2018] EWHC 1583 (Admin): successfully defending Ofgem in a JR challenge to its embedded benefits decision.
• Western Power Distribution v GEMA [2014]: successfully defending Ofgem in a judicial review challenge to its distribution losses mechanism/ price control.
• R (Albion Water) v Ofwat [2012] EWHC 2259: judicial review of bulk supply price.
• R (Thames Water) v Ofwat [2012] EWCA Civ 218: regulatory JR re water inset appointments.

Other regulatory

Kassie has advised the Payment Systems Regulator on various issues and, most recently, successfully defended it against a judicial review challenge of its decision not to regulate the fees paid by LINK for the use of its ATM cash machines: Notemachine UK Ltd v Payment Systems Regulator [2023] EWHC 2522 (Admin).

She has also advised the Office of the Rail Regulator on the interaction between EC and international law on infrastructure and track access agreements.

She has advised both airports and airlines on various regulatory and related commercial matters, including charging issues and the CAA’s five-year charging review.

Kassie has exceptional expertise and experience before the European Courts and the English courts in cases raising issues of EU law (from the High Court to the Supreme Court). She has acted in over 30 cases before the CJEU and, having been called to the Irish bar, continues to act in the European courts post Brexit.

She has appeared in cases concerning a variety of issues, including free movement rights, jurisdiction, sanctions, public procurement, insolvency, telecoms, industrial relations and social policy.  She has particular expertise in EU environmental law, and is recognised in the Directories as having “an amazing knowledge of EU law” and “a commanding court presence”.

.

Cases

A selection of Kassie’s past cases include:

• Cases T‑605/21and T-606/21 TestBio Tech eV v Commission, judgments of General Court of 18 October 2023: challenges to authorizations for the placing on the EU market of genetically modified maize and soybeans.
• Ryanair v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2018] EWCA Civ 899: acting for Ryanair in a challenge to the Government’s air carrier liability scheme as being contrary to EU free movement rights.
• Case T-33/16 TestBio Tech eV v Commission, judgment of General Court of 14 March 2018: successful challenge to Commission’s rejection of an application for internal review of market authorisation decisions concerning the concept of ‘environmental law’ under Article 10 of Regulation No 1367/2006.
• R. (on the application of ClientEarth) v Secretary of State for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs [2016] EWHC 2740 (Admin): challenge to the Government’s Air Quality Plan for nitrogen dioxide.
• R. (on the application of Greenpeace Ltd) v Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs [2016] EWHC 55 (Admin): challenge to the Government’s fisheries policy.
• Hook v British Airways [2014] UKSC 15: Montreal Convention and EU Access to Air Travel Regulation.
• ClientEarth v SSEFRA [2014] ECR 0000; [2013] UKSC 25: CJEU and Supreme Court proceedings on breach of EU Air Quality Directive.
• Bucks CC v S/S for Transport [2014] UKSC 3: Supreme court proceedings in judicial review of high speed rail (HS2).
• UK Association of Fish Producers Organisations v S/S for Environment Food and Rural Affairs [2013] EWHC 1959 (Admin): reallocation of fishing quota.
• X v Mid Sussex CAB [2012] UKSC 59: Supreme Court proceedings on the application of EU discrimination law to volunteers.
• Edwards v Environment Agency and others [2008] 1 WLR 1587, (2008) Env LR 34: a challenge in House of Lords to the government’s implementation of the EIA Directive, also important issues of principle relating to a public body’s obligation to consult on “internal” documents.
• OSS Group v Environment Agency and DEFRA [2007] EWCA Civ 611: whether waste derived fuel was waste for the purposes of the EC waste regime under Directive 2006/12/EC.
• Greenpeace v Secretary of State for Trade and Industry (2007) Env LR 29: acting for Greenpeace in its successful challenge to the Govt’s decision to support new nuclear build.
• International Transport Workers’ Federation and Finnish Seaman’s Union v Viking Lines (2006) 1 Lloyd’s Rep 303: whether EC Treaty rules on free movement prohibit the taking of industrial action by national unions in protest at the employment of low wage labour.
• Rutherford & Bentley [2006] UKHL 19, (2006) ICR 785: a challenge to the legislation imposing upper age limits for unfair dismissal and redundancy payments. Kassie acted at all stages in the litigation from the Stratford Employment Tribunal through to the House of Lords.
• Case C-6/04 Commission v United Kingdom [2005] ECR I-9017: defending the UK Government before the ECJ in infraction proceedings alleging inadequate implementation of the Habitats Directive.
• Blackland Park (Exploration) Limited v Environment Agency [2004] Env LR 33, CA: successfully defending the EA in the Court of Appeal in a case on the interpretation of the Landfill Directive.

Competition Law: “She is brilliant on her feet when I saw her, really impressive as an advocate.” “She works well in a team and is a good advocate.” “She is bright, pragmatic, not too theoretical, and practical in application.” “Kassie is a delight to work with.” “She is pleasant to deal with, and is willing to get her hands dirty and do the work.” “I have seen Kassie on her feet a lot, and she is very calm and reasoned.” – Chambers UK, 2024

European Law: “I always think Kassie is very good; she brings a really good sense of judgement to her matters.” – Chambers UK, 2024

Telecommunications: “Kassie is a calm and effective lead counsel who is very smart and user-friendly.” – Chambers UK, 2024

Leading silk in Competition: “Kassie is a leader in the competition law field with huge legal knowledge, gives extremely careful and considered advice and is a compelling advocate.” – Legal 500, 2024

Leading silk in EU Law: “Kassie is perfection. Her drafting is impeccable, her analysis is invariably spot on, and her cross-examination is devastatingly effective.” – Legal 500, 2024

Leading silk in Telecoms (Regulatory): “Kassie is unflappable, pragmatic and holds the court’s attention.” – Legal 500, 2024

Competition Law: “Kassie is a very good person to have around in a tough spot because she is very level-headed and calm. She is an effective and straightforward advocate who is much liked by judges.” – Chambers UK and Chambers Global, 2023

European Law: “She has a commanding court presence.” – Chambers UK, 2023

Telecommunications: “She is a fantastic advocate who is good with clients.” – Chambers UK, 2023

Leading silk in Competition: “As well as a vast knowledge of competition law, Kassie has very strong analytical, drafting and advocacy skills.” – Legal 500, 2023

Leading silk in EU Law – Legal 500, 2023

Leading silk in Telecoms (Regulatory) – Legal 500, 2023

“Kassie Smith QC earns praise as a leader in competition litigation, with interviewees hailing her as  “a pleasure to work with and strategically very sound”.” – Competition, Who’s Who Legal Global Guide 2022

Recommended in Competition, Who’s Who Legal UK Bar 2022

Recommended in Energy & Natural Resources, Who’s Who Legal UK Bar 2022

Competition: “She has a really good eye for detail and gives cases the time they need. She is calm in court under pressure from aggressive judges.” “Very constructive in her comments and advice.” “Incredibly responsive and hard-working.” – Chambers UK and Chambers Global, 2022

European: “She gives really good honest, thorough and candid advice, which I appreciate.” – Chambers UK, 2022

Telecommunications: “She guided us through a very challenging process with an extremely calm and measured approach, demonstrating clear judgement as to how best to conduct our defence. Despite her seniority, she was very approachable and receptive to additional viewpoints and discussions as to how the case should be managed.” – Chambers UK, 2022

Leading silk in Competition: “She is open to new ideas and good at presenting arguments in simple terms.” – Legal 500, 2022

Leading silk in EU Law: “Kassie’s advocacy is excellent – incisive and engaging. Kassie is conscientious and both a master of the detail and a brilliant strategist.” – Legal 500, 2022

Leading silk in IT and Telecoms (Regulatory): “Kassie is measured and knowledgeable, and a pleasure to work with.” – Legal 500, 2022

“Kassie Smith QC is held in high esteem for “knowing European competition law inside out”, with sources also commending her “clear, succinct and practical advice” – Competition, Who’s Who Legal 2021

Telecommunications: “She is measured in her approach and excellent at strategy, which ensures that the case is on a good footing from the outset.” – Chambers UK, 2021

European: “She is very calm and very measured. Clients really like the way she thinks calmly through the issues in difficult situations and comes up with solutions.” – Chambers UK, 2021

Competition: “She is very calm and very measured. Clients really like the way she thinks calmly through the issues in difficult situations and comes up with solutions.” – Chambers UK and Chambers Global, 2021

Leading silk in Competition: ‘‘Kassie is an excellent advocate. Her written advice is also cogent, well-reasoned and easy to follow. She offers thorough and considered advice.’’ – Legal 500, 2021

Leading silk in EU Law: ‘‘Kassie is clever, calm and collected. Responsiveness and excellent team working are two real strengths.’’ – Legal 500, 2021

Leading silk in IT and Telecoms (Regulatory): ‘‘She exemplifies calmness and intelligence and is an excellent team member and exceptionally responsive.’’ – Legal 500, 2021

“A “terrific advocate” who is “legally excellent” and “a real team player”, according to peers.” – Competition, Who’s Who Legal UK Bar 2020

Telecommunications: “She is sensible about what can be achieved and understands that clients can’t always deliver perfect evidence and information. A very good draftsperson who it’s enjoyable to work with.” – Chambers UK, 2020

European: “Her rapport with the client is very good; she is able to set the client at ease and be quite frank with them about the whole process.” – Chambers UK, 2020

Competition: “You can rely upon her to working incredibly well with the team when building a case.” “She is calm and level-headed in a crisis, tackling everything with a good deal of pragmatism.” “Clients really appreciate her advice as she can get across difficult issues and make them easy to understand.” – Chambers UK and Chambers Global, 2020

Leading silk in Competition: ‘‘A brilliant mind and able communicator with an easy manner.’’ – Legal 500, 2020

Leading silk in EU Law: ‘‘An excellent advocate, who also provides cogent and well-reasoned advice.’’ – Legal 500, 2020

“An “extremely good barrister” and “a real team player”, say sources. She stands out for her extensive experience handling competition-related matters” – Competition, Who’s Who Legal UK Bar 2019

Competition: “Very considered and practical. She has a good grasp of the detail in a case and is very tuned in to the client’s concerns and aims.” – Chambers UK and Chambers Global, 2019

European: “She is one of the leading silks for EU free movement rights, and her way of explaining things to the client and her client management skills have been excellent.” – Chambers UK, 2019

Telecommunications: “She has a very thorough grasp of the fundamentals in the telecoms area” and “she really has oodles of common sense.” “She works hard, is approachable and is flexible when it comes to attending to the client’s needs.” – Chambers UK, 2019

Leading silk in Competition: ‘‘Straightforward to work with and excellent at dealing with clients’’ – Legal 500, 2018

Leading silk in EU Law: ‘‘Straightforward to work with and excellent at dealing with clients and creating a favourable impression.’’ –Legal 500, 2018

Competition: “She is very responsive, writes clearly and is good at explaining English law concepts to US clients.” – Chambers UK, 2018

European: “She is very responsive, writes clearly, is commercial and has a real presence.” – Chambers UK, 2018

Telecommunications: “A hard-working and calm barrister with considerable expertise in telecoms regulatory matters as well as mainstream competition issues.” “She is extremely persuasive on her feet and a highly impressive barrister.” – Chambers UK, 2018

Leading silk in Competition: ‘‘Wonderfully pragmatic in her approach.’’ – Legal 500, 2017

Leading silk in EU Law: ‘‘A lateral thinker for complex regulatory matters.’’ – Legal 500, 2017

Leading silk in Environment: ‘‘Thoroughly recommended for high-profile air pollution matters.’’ – Legal 500, 2017

Administrative & Public Law: “A consummate professional, she knows everything there is to know about judicial review and has a real clarity and focus about her.” She brings simplicity to complexity.” – Chambers UK, 2017

Competition Law: “Very approachable and easy to get on with, she’s very fast, clear and someone who cuts to the chase.” – Chambers UK, 2017

Environment: “She has excellent legal qualifications and is very helpful to the solicitor in the preparation of cases.” – Chambers UK, 2017

European Law: “Her advocacy is effective and to the point.” –Chambers UK, 2017

Telecommunications: “She has a clarity and focus about her in court which brings simplicity to the complex.” “She’s very clever, extremely talented and very user-friendly.” – Chambers UK, 2017

Leading silk in EU and Competition: “Responsive and commercial, and she knows when not to overcook things.” – Legal 500, 2016

Leading silk in Environment: “She adopts a very practical approach to difficult issues and is a good team player.” – Legal 500, 2016

Administrative & Public Law: ”She is reserved and poised so when she speaks people listen.” “She’s very effective.” – Chambers UK, 2016

Competition Law:  “An extremely good barrister who is legally excellent and has an abundance of common sense.” “She’s strong on strategic thinking and is user-friendly.” – Chambers UK & Chambers Global, 2016

Environment:  “She is a really good advocate who is very thorough and easy to work with.” – Chambers UK, 2016

European Law: “She is brilliant and has two amazing skills; she knows everything about EU law and is the fastest worker I have ever met. Her written style is very straightforward and there is no messing around; she is really excellent.” – Chambers UK, 2016

Telecommunications: “She is able to bring clarity to complex issues and do it quickly.” “Very sensible and strategically unflappable.” – Chambers UK, 2016

Leading Silk in EU and Competition Law: ”An exceptional and fearless advocate.” Legal 500, 2015

Competition Law: “She knows her stuff and has a good head on her shoulders.” “She stands her ground and thinks hard about questions.” – Chambers UK, 2015

Environment: “She has an amazing knowledge of EU law and is an excellent member of the team.” “Her paperwork is very good and done at exceptional speed.” – Chambers UK, 2015

European Law: “Her paperwork is exceptional and she produces it at great speed.” “Very calm and measured when dealing with the judiciary.” – Chambers UK, 2015

Telecommunications: “Incredibly accessible, proactive and really down to earth.” “She has broad experience in telecoms and the broader competition field, and is destined to become one of the most sought-after QCs.” – Chambers UK, 2015

Under Competition Law: Viewed as highly deserving of her recent elevation to silk, she is routinely seen acting on behalf of regulators such as the OFT. Has also done several high-profile cases representing private clients, including Guardian Care Homes, which arose from the Libor fixing scandal. “Technically very good and a skilful advocate.” “She is very hard-working and client-friendly.”Chambers UK, 2014

Under Environment Law: A new silk with a strong reputation in environment cases, particularly those involving EU law. She has acted in a number of leading environmental challenges on behalf of NGOs, public bodies and private individuals. “She is measured, structured and clear, and gets the points across in an unfussy way.” Chambers UK, 2014

Under European Law: “Measured, structured and clear, she gets her points across in an unfussy way.”Chambers UK, 2014

The ‘hardworking, efficient and client-friendly’ Kassie Smith QC is recommended as a new Silk in Adminstrative and Public Law.Legal 500, 2013

Kassie is also recommended as a new Silk in Environmental Law and Telecommunications Law. Legal 500, 2013

“New silk Kassie Smith QC is a ‘clear and innovative thinker‘,” recommended under EU & Competition Law. Legal 500, 2013

Competition / European Law: “Kassie Smith is “a real team player” who is repeatedly applauded for her “strong and efficient” advocacy and “very clear and well-drawn submissions.” These attributes contribute to her continuing popularity with instructing solicitors, and her practice extends to both competition and EU law.” Chambers UK, 2013

Under Environment Law: “Kassie Smith has a good relationship with government departments and recently acted for DEFRA in successfully dismissing a judicial review concerning whether the government had failed to meet its air quality targets.” – Legal 500, 2012

Kassie Smith is recommended as a leading junior in Administrative and Public Law. Legal 500, 2012

Kassie Smith is recommended as a leading junior in EU and Competition Law. Legal 500, 2012

Kassie Smith is recommended as a leading junior in Environment Law. Legal 500, 2012

Under Competition/EU law – “Instructing solicitors seek him out … Kassie Smith, who brings to the table “a commonsense approach and all-round legal excellence.” She has been acting for the Competition Commission in Stagecoach Group Plc v Competition Commission.” – Chambers UK, 2012

Environment – “Kassie Smith has an excellent track record in both domestic and EU environmental law, and is currently representing a transatlantic coalition of environmental groups in an intervention to a case brought by a group of airlines and their trade association. The case concerns Europe’s right to tackle carbon emissions from aircraft that travel through Europe. Sources are quick to praise her “fine attention to detail and practical and pragmatic advice.”” – Chambers UK, 2012

Administrative & Public Law recommends Kassie Smith as  leading junior. Legal 500, 2011

EU & Competition Law recommends Kassie Smith as  leading junior. Legal 500, 2011

Monckton Chambers’ Kassie Smith is ‘exceptionally bright, approachable and willing to go the extra mile to find a solution’. Legal 500, 2011

Kassie Smith, recommended under Competition/European Law in Chambers UK, 2011 “is recognised for the fact that “she gets to the crux of a problem quickly.” Smith acted unled for Waitrose as intervener in Tesco’s appeal against the OFT’s decision to make various impositions upon it following an investigation into the groceries market.”

“Kassie Smith is recognised for her experience of EU and domestic environmental law. She has been particularly active in various matters on behalf of the Environment Agency, and also advised Greenpeace on a number of issues, including on the challenge to plans designed to increase air traffic at Stansted Airport.” – Chambers UK, 2011