en id en en en en en en en en en nl en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en pt en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en de en en en en en en en en en en ko en en en hi en en en en en de en en en en en en en en en de en en en en en en en pt en en en en de en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en nl en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en pt en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en fr en fr en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en pt en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en sv eu oc en en en ko en en en hi en en en en en de en en en en en en en en en de id en en en en en en en en en en nl en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en de en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en gu en
MA (Cantab) (First Class) (Law & Economics) (Trinity Hall); LL.M. (University of California, Berkeley) (Fulbright)
Call: 1994 | 2000 (New South Wales) | 2018 (Ireland) | Silk: 2011
“A powerful advocate and a strong force in court.” “He narrows down the salient points and is forceful in his delivery of them.” - Chambers UK 2020
Which sections would you like to include in your PDF download?
Administrative law including human rights
Sports, entertainment & media commercial & competition
Paul is The Lawyer Barrister of the Year 2021
Sport: “He is tough and extremely well prepared in court.” – Chambers UK, 2022
Competition Law: “If you want him to go to battle for a client he is fantastic – he will make the points very strongly.” “I think he is good at seeing the big-picture strategic points. Very good at understanding the dynamic of the cases and where the pressure points are – this is thanks to his experience. He has an adaptable style on his feet as well. He is excellent, approachable and open to new ideas.” “Paul is easy to work with; he is client-focused and personable.” – Chambers UK and Chambers Global, 2022
“Paul is one of the most tenacious advocates at the Bar. He is not afraid to take and argue a point that might not, at first blush, be hugely attractive to the court.” – Legal 500, 2022
“Head and shoulders the best sports lawyer at the Bar. A brave and effective strategist and a persuasive advocate.” – Legal 500, 2022
Paul is recognised as one of The Lawyer’s Hot 100 2021
Barrister of the Week, The Lawyer, December 2020
Leading silk in Competition: ‘‘Very pragmatic and straightforward.’’– Legal 500, 2020
Leading silk in Sport: ‘‘A very forceful and direct advocate.’’– Legal 500, 2020
“Receives recognition from respondents as “a very strong advocate in court” and “a standout on sports-related issues” – Competition, Who’s Who Legal UK Bar 2019
“Hugely well regarded” in the sports space. He is described by peers as “a very bright and strong advocate”, and wins praise for his work on arbitration and litigation proceedings” – Sports, Who’s Who Legal UK Bar 2019
Competition Law: “He is a very effective courtroom advocate,” and “knows his subject matter very well.” – Chambers UK and Chambers Global, 2019
Sport: “A real sports expert.” “Excellent advocate and impressive clarity of thought in competition-related but also commercial matters.” “Extremely robust.” – Chambers UK, 2019
“He is very good at getting on top of the detail and is a great cross-examiner who presents complex issues in a simple manner.” – Chambers UK, 2018
“He is very user-friendly and a real sport expert.” “He is a seriously bright lawyer.” “He exudes utter confidence and is extremely good with clients.” “He lives up to his reputation: a big hitter in the sport sector with vast competition law experience.” – Chambers UK, 2018
For instance, in 2020 Paul led the successful appeal before CAS by Manchester City FC against the decision by UEFA to ban the Club from the Champions League and succeeded for the Claimant in the Supreme Court in what has been described as the largest ever UK damages action – the Merricks v. Mastercard collective proceedings claim brought on behalf of most UK adults. He also currently (2021) leads the defence for Daimler in two other collective actions (UKTC and the RHA), and in multiple Truck cartel damages actions, and for LSER in a further stand-alone collective action (Gutmann). In 2018, Paul led the defence in an expedited commercial and competition action about the launch of a controversial on-line property portal, OnTheMarket, and led the judicial review challenge by Intercontinental Exchange against the CMA in relation to ICE’s merger with Trayport (2017). He was also Leader in the substantial follow-on cartel damages action (Air Cargo, 2016), was Leader for the successful Respondent in the cutting-edge judicial review about merger jurisdiction of the CMA (Eurotunnel – Supreme Court)(2015), and carried Arriva to success in their abuse of dominance trial against Luton Airport concerning airport bus services (2014).
In the world of commercial arbitration, Paul has acted as advocate in recent commercial arbitrations concerning satellite services and international gas supply and pricing and as arbitrator in disputes concerning boxing, tennis and football.
Paul is established as the leading Silk in the world of Formula 1. He has been Leader for Mercedes GP in two recent, successful International Court of Appeal arbitration cases that have helped to cement their dominance at the top of Formula 1 (‘Pirelli Tyre-gate’ & ‘Ricciardo fuel-flow’) and regularly acts for other teams, managers, drivers and sponsors and regulatory and commercial bodies in the sport.
Paul’s practice includes representing many football clubs – as well as agents, players, directors, regulatory bodies and other commercial entities connected with the sport. Recent and regular clients have included Manchester City FC, Manchester City Womens FC, Leeds United FC, Liverpool FC, Manchester United FC, Hull FC, Leicester City FC, Watford FC, West Bromwich Albion, QPR, Fulham FC, Derby FC, Luton FC, Plymouth Argyle FC, Middlesborough FC, Tottenham Hotspur FC, Chelsea FC, Arsenal FC, Aston Villa FC, Crystal Palace FC and Newcastle United FC . Paul is very experienced in all manner of other sports and sports commercial disputes, in all disciplinary and regulatory fora, including CAS. For example, Paul represents Saracens RFC and has acted regularly for the RFU.
Paul remains qualified as an EU lawyer post-Brexit, having been called to the Bar in Ireland in 2018.
Other high- profile current or recent cases include:
acting in disputes concerning the legality of car designs in the 2019 F1 season
acting in collective sales disputes in the field of broadcasting
acting for Google in a cutting-edge dispute concerning patent-licensing and FRAND
acting for Tesla in an expedited dispute about access to UK motorway infrastructure
acting in relation to market-sharing, price-fixing, pay-for-delay in the pharmaceutical sector
acting for a major energy company in relation to arbitration disputes concerning European gas purchasing and trading
acting for high-profile sports bodies in arbitral disputes relating to the rugby union salary cap, and financial fair play in football
acting for Actavis in the leading case about second-medical use patents
successfully defending Stansted airport in an abuse of dominance case brought by an international bus company
acting for the captain of Yorkshire Cricket Club in a dispute about alleged racist language
acting for a Premier League manager in a large damages arbitration against his former Premier League club
acting for an F1 driver in relation to a fatal accident
acting for the manager of an F1 driver
acting for a team in the Le Mans 24hr race
acting for a large oil company in relation to petrol distribution
acting against a former statutory monopolist in relation to margin squeeze, excessive pricing and other abusive practices in a commodities market
acting for the agent of a Premier League football player in an arbitral dispute about breach of, and inducement to breach, contract
defending IMI plc in multiple damages actions for cartel behaviour, including the recent Court of Appeal successes in Newson v IMI (concerning the role of intent in a follow-on damages action) and IMI v Delta (meaning and application of the Civil Liability (Contribution) Act to limitation defences by contributors)
acting for Liverpool FC in relation to the Luis Suarez ‘biting’ incident at the Brazil World Cup
acting for an SPV on VAT issues arising from a high-profile Central London development
acting for NHS bodies to recover damages from Reckitt Benckiser following its abuse of its dominant position in relation to the drug Gaviscon
acting for a Premier League club in a CAS arbitration transfer dispute with FIFA concerning operation of the TMS system
acting for Racing Point F1 team in the ICA case concerning the clutch control of the 2019 Alfa Romeo F1 cars
Court of Appeal confirms that collective proceedings regime allows issues of liability to be determined at the aggregate level, dismissing train operating companies’ appeals in the ‘Boundary Fares’ claims
The Legal 500 Bar Awards UK 2022 – Monckton in the shortlist for 13 accolades
Chambers Global 2022 – Set recognition in Competition Law (UK) and 38 individuals ranked across three practice areas: Competition Law (UK), Public International Law: The English Bar and Dispute Resolution: Commercial (UK)
Competition Collective Actions: Leveraging Canadian Legal Principles in the UK’s New Regime – Paul Harris QC to moderate
Chambers Bar Awards 2021 – Monckton success as Set wins for Competition and Ben Lask is Competition Junior of the Year
Paul Harris QC is Barrister of the Year in The Lawyer Awards
Intercontinental Exchange v CMA [2017] CAT 7 (merger judicial review in the markets for electronic energy trading)
CMA v. GET and SCOP (December 2015, Supreme Court)(leading case on UK merger jurisdiction)
John Lewis plc v. OFT [2013] CAT 7 (judicial review challenge concerning extended warranties website decision)
Tottenham Hotspur and others v. The Olympic Park Legacy Corporation and others (Admin) (2012) (judicial review and state aid challenge to the decision to select the West Ham Consortium as the preferred bidder for the Olympic Stadium)
BAA v. Competition Commission [2012] EWCA Civ 1077 (Court of Appeal)(judicial review challenge to order compelling divestiture of Stansted airport)
Stephen Brennan v. The Health Professions Council [2011] EWHC 41 (Admin) (‘Bloodgate’ appeal; failure of professional disciplinary body to give adequate reasons)
Sports Direct v. The Competition Commission [2009] CAT (Enterprise Act s.120, judicial review challenge to CC’s disclosure procedure during course of merger inquiry)
MAN ERF v. HMRC (2008) (judicial review of HMRC policy of apportionment of s.61 penalties as between directors and company)
R (Boughton & Others) v. HM Treasury (2006)(Admin. Court) (conscientious objection, freedom of religion, Article 9 ECHR)
Taylor v. Lancashire CC (2005) HRLR 17 (Court of Appeal) (Article 14 ECHR, scope and effect of HRA 1998, meaning of “victim”)
Hawkins & Feakins v. Rural Payments Agency (2005) (Court of Appeal) (statutory construction, transactions at an undervalue, direct effect, EC law damages, trespass)
R v. ITC ex p TVDanmark (2004) (House of Lords) (TV Without Frontiers Directive, cross-border transmissions)
Fiat Chrysler Automobiles v. NTN [2020](follow-on damages action related to ball bearings cartel)
Dawsongroup v. Daimler AG & others [2020] (on-going Trucks cartel litigation)
Philips v. HTC and Asustek [2019] (FRAND and competition disputes regarding mobile phone licensing)
acting in relation to allegations concerning groundworks infringements
Agents’ Mutual v. Gascoigne Halman [2017][CAT] (expedited competition action concerning the launch of a new online property portal, OnTheMarket)
Unwired Planet v. Google, Samsung Huawei [2017] EWHC 711 (Pat) (disputes concerning FRAND licensing and abuse of dominance)
other international FRAND litigation (confidential)
Illinois Tool Works v. CMA [2016] (infringement for minimum advertised prices, penalties)
Air Cargo Litigation (former Leader for the Claimants in this large competition damages action)
WH Newson v. IMI plc & ors (Copper Tube and Copper Fittings cartels, damages actions and contribution proceedings)
NHS v. Reckitt Benckiser (‘Gaviscon’, pharma abuse of dominance, damages action)
Nokia v. Hitachi and others (LCD and CRT cartels, multi-Defendant, multi-jurisdictional damages action)
Cable & Wireless v. OFCOM [2009] CAT (leased lines charge control, telecoms regulation)
PKF Corringway v. OFT [2009] CAT (construction cartel, penalty appeal)
Cresta Furntiure v. Natuzzi [2009] (Ch) (furniture distribution, alleged RPM)
Hays plc v. OFT [2009] CAT (construction recruitment cartel, penalty appeal, challenge to MDT)
Eden Brown & Others v. OFT (2009) (construction recruitment cartel, penalties)
William Hill & Ladbrokes & others v. Racing UK & others [2009] EWCA Civ 750 (Court of Appeal, ‘TurfTV’ new broadcasting market entrant, Ch I prohibition, horizontal collusion, foreclosure, exclusivity, collectivity, effect of article 81(2))
Chester City Council v. Arriva [2007] EWHC 1373 (Ch) (market for bus services, abuse of dominance, ‘flooding’, predatory pricing, geographic scope)
adidas v. the ITF & others [2006] EWHC 2262 (Ch) (challenge to rules of tennis world governing body and Grand Slams, Articles 81EC and 82EC, discrimination, disproportionate impact, interim injunction)
Umbro; Manchester United Plc; JJB Sports; Allsports Ltd v OFT [2005] CAT 22 (price-fixing cartel for replica football shirts, level of penalties)
Other Commercial including arbitration
private commercial arbitration concerning international gas pricing (2017)(Allen & Overy)
Agents Mutual v. Gascoigne Halman (2017)(dispute in relation to misrepresentation and termination)
private commercial arbitration concerning satellite services (2016)(Freshfields)
private arbitration concerning contracts between a Premier League manager and his former Premier League club (2016)(Edwin Coe)
confidential contract disputes in the field of Formula 1 racing (2016)
confidential contract disputes in the field of international energy sales (2016)(Norton Rose)
confidential contract disputes in the field of cosmetics, and jewelry, distribution (2016)
confidential arbitration disputes in the field of corporate governance of sports bodies (2016)
confidential contract disputes in the field of international football player transfer (2016)
Sir Martin Broughton vs Hicks & Gillett and others (High Court)(2010) (dispute regarding the sale of Liverpool FC)
Alstom v. Eurostar and Siemens (High Court)(2011) (public procurement challenge to tender for new Eurostar trains)
FMC Foret v. Unilever [2009] (Commercial Court) (worldwide sales of STPP)
Nokia Gmbh v. IPCOM (2009)(FRAND patent issues re mobile phones)
BWFC v. Kalivions (2009)(liability under image rights agreements)
SuperAguri (2008) (Formula 1 contract dispute)
MSM SATELLITE (SINGAPORE) (2008) (valuation of broadcasting rights)
Frontier Estates (2008) (directors’ liability, breach of trust)
ALPHAMERIC / SIS (2008) (use of horse racing data rights)
disputes concerning broadcasting of high profile football matches (2017)
dispute concerning the broadcasting of leading boxing bouts in the UK (2016)
dispute concerning broadcasting of cricket (2016)
Sky and The FAPL v. Ofcom and others [CAT] (2011) (challenge to Ofcom’s decision to impose the Wholesale Must Offer remedy upon Sky in respect of its supplies of Sky Sports 1 and 2)
William Hill & Ladbrokes & others v. Racing UK & others [2009] EWCA Civ 750 (Court of Appeal, ‘TurfTV’ new broadcasting market entrant, Ch I prohibition, horizontal collusion, foreclosure, exclusivity, collectivity, effect of article 81(2))
The Film Council (2010): advising on the Government’s plans to disband The Film Council
Carlton/Granada merger: advising on issues arising out of the merger remedy
R v. ITC ex p TVDanmark (House of Lords) (TV Without Frontiers Directive, cross-border transmissions)
Bacardi-Martini v TÉLÉVISION FRANÇAISE TF1 (CASE C-429/02) (compatibility with EU law of alcohol advertising in cross-border transmissions)
RTL Television v .NLPR (Case No. C-245/01) (compatibility of legislation regarding advertising breaks with EU law)
disputes concerning financial fair play in football and salary cap in rugby union (2016-2017)
disputes concerning international football transfers (2016-2017)
Tottenham Hotspur and others v. The Olympic Park Legacy Corporation and others (Admin) (2012) (judicial review and state aid challenge to the decision to select the West Ham Consortium as the preferred bidder for the Olympic Stadium)
Beheer (2008) Case C-124/07 (VAT treatment of insurance intermediaries)
HMRC v. Isle of Wight Council (2008) Case C-288/07 (correct meaning of Article 4(5) 6th Directive, “significant distortions of competition”)
Securenta (2008) Case C‑437/06 (economic and non-economic activities, right to deduct)
Gotz (2007) C‑408/06 (economic activity, transactions of agricultural intervention agencies and staff shops, geographic market)
Compaq (2006) Case C-306/04 (customs value, laptop computers equipped with operating systems software)
Tempelman (2005) (ECJ) (interpretation of Community animal health legislation, foot and mouth epidemic)
Bacardi-Martini v TÉLÉVISION FRANÇAISE TF1 (CASE C-429/02) (compatibility with EU law of alcohol advertising in cross-border transmissions)
RTL Television v .NLPR (Case No. C-245/01) (compatibility of legislation regarding advertising breaks with EU law)
acting for high-profile sports bodies in relation to the rugby union salary cap, and financial fair play in football (2016-2017)
acting for the captain of Yorkshire Cricket Club in a dispute about alleged racist language (2015)
acting for an F1 driver in relation to a near-fatal accident (2015)
acting for the agent of a Premier League football player in a dispute about breach of, and inducement to breach, contract (2017)
acting for many sports bodies in relation to broadcasting rights (on-going)
acting for Liverpool FC in relation to the Luis Suarez ‘biting’ incident at the Brazil World Cup (2014)
acting for Mercedes GP in two recent, successful International Court of Appeal cases that have helped to cement their dominance at the top of Formula 1 (‘Pirelli Tyre-gate’ & ‘Ricciardo fuel-flow’)
acting for a Premier League club owner in relation to a proposed sale (2017)
acting for Leeds United FC and Massimo Cellino in recent disciplinary action brought by The FA (2016)
acting for Liverpool FC in relation to multiple disciplinary actions by UEFA (2016)
acting against Cardiff City FC in relation to disputes with former directors and owners (2015-16)
acting in relation to various confidential personnel, contractual and corporate governance issues in the field of Formula 1
Disputes concerning athlete and team Olympic selection (2012), including Joe Ward v. AIBA and IOC (2012) CAS ad hoc division
Disputes concerning athlete and team Olympic selection (2012)
Disputes concerning application of London Olympic Association Right (2012)
Disputes concerning Olympic Team Members/Participation Agreement (2012)
Tottenham Hotspur and others v. The Olympic Park Legacy Corporation and others (2011) (Admin) (judicial review challenge to the decision to select the West Ham Consortium as the preferred bidder for the Olympic Stadium)
3 strikes and out: dispute regarding application of 3 missed drugs test rule to gold medal contender Olympic athlete (2011)
Dispute about the entry of Team GB football team to the Olympic tournament (2011)
Portsmouth FC v. Tottenham Hotspur FC (2011) (PL arbitration) (Transfer dispute)
Netball New Zealand v. IFNA (CAS) (challenge to the decision on eligibility of a leading NZ netball player)
World Cup Vote Affair (2011) (FIFA Ethics and Appeal Committees and then CAS)(allegations of bribery in respect of 2018 and 2022 World Cup votes)
Fulham FC v. Sir David Richards and The FAPL (2011)(Court of Appeal)(whether football unfair prejudice petition should be litigated by arbitration or in the Companies Court)
Stephen Brennan v. HPC [2011] EWHC 41 (Admin)(‘Bloodgate’ appeal; failure of professional disciplinary body to give adequate reasons)
Celtic Rugby Board v. Ospreys [2010] (CR Disciplinary Panel) (disciplinary and misconduct charges for failing to fulfil Match fixture)
Premier Rugby v. London Wasps [2009] (PR Panel) (alleged rule breaches from non-fulfilment of fixture)
Bolton Wanderers FC v. Nicolas Anelka & others [2009] (High Court) (image rights dispute)
The Renault ‘crashgate’ hearing before the WMSC
The Formula 1 ‘budget cap’ and ‘breakaway’ dispute
Ferrari v. FIA & Brawn GP (2009)(International Court of Appeal) (“diffusers” appeal)
Adrian Mutu v. Chelsea FC (2009) (CAS appeal against compensation order)
McLaren Mercedes v. FIA (2008) (International Court of Appeal) (appeal against Stewards Decision, Spa Grand Prix, admissibility, obtaining an advantage)
Sheffield United FC v. West Ham United FC (2008)(FA Arbitration) (CAS appeal)(compensation for relegation arising out of West Ham’s use of Carlos Tevez)
Luton Town FC v. The FA (2008) (transfer rules breach, deduction of points)
Bergamasco & Del Fava v. 6 Nations (6 Nations disciplinary hearings, Italian RFU)
Gabriel Heinze v. Manchester United FC (2007) (Premier League) (disputed transfer to Liverpool FC)
The Carlos Tevez affair (2007) (Premier League fine on West Ham, disputes with rights owners)
Jon Obi Mikel and Chelsea FC v. Manchester United FC (2006) (FIFA Dispute Resolution Committee) (dispute over pre-contract option agreement, Nigerian international player)
Manchester City FC v. Joe Royle [2005] EWCA Civ 195 (Court of Appeal) (interpretation of commercial contract, termination of service, Premiership club and former manager)
A major London land development (2013) (options to tax, planning gain agreements, exemption, ‘funding’ and Schedule 10 anti-avoidance measures)
Dreams Beds plc v HMRC (2013) (fiscal neutrality, zero-rating of supplies made to invalids)
HMRC v. Isle of Wight Council & others Case (ongoing) (supplies of car parking services, correct meaning of Article 4(5) 6th Directive, “significant distortions of competition”)
MAN ERF v. HMRC (2012) (FTC/66/2010) (Upper Tribunal)(dishonesty attribution to company, penalties, mitigation, proportionality)
Hammersmith and West London College v HMRC (VAT Tribunal)(election to waive exemption over sale of educational land site)
Ford Motor Company & others v. HMRC [2008] EWHC 712 (Admin) (VAT period staggers, legislation and policy)
RFU v HMRC (VAT Tribunal) (financing of property transactions by means of debentures, nature of supplies, taxable/exempt)
Securenta (2008) Case C‑437/06 (economic and non-economic activities, right to deduct)
ICSIL (IDT) v. HMRC (2006) (Court of Appeal) (VAT treatment of vouchers, Marleasing doctrine, territorial scope of 6th Directive)
Southampton University v HMRC [2006] EWHC 528 (Ch) (whether publicly funded research within the scope of VAT, scope of the right to deduct)
Zielinski Baker [2004] UKHL 7 (House of Lords)( zero-rating of land development re protected buildings)
Administrative law including human rights
Paul was for many years a member of the A Panel of Treasury Counsel and amassed considerable experience in the field of public and administrative law, both for and against the Government. He continues to be particularly active in contested court/tribunal work, at all levels, and is regularly instructed in judicial review proceedings and/or to advise in relation to judicial review. Recent examples include Eurotunnel (2016)(Supreme Court) and ICE v. CMA [2017] CAT, John Lewis plc v. OFT [2013] CAT 7 (judicial review challenge concerning extended warranties website decision), Portsmouth Supporters Trust (2013) (state aid complaint concerning a football stadium), Tottenham Hotspur and others v. The Olympic Park Legacy Corporation and others (Admin) (2012) (judicial review and state aid challenge to the decision to select the West Ham Consortium as the preferred bidder for the Olympic Stadium), BAA v. Competition Commission [2012] EWCA Civ 1077 (Court of Appeal)(judicial review challenge to order compelling divestiture of Stansted airport).
Other high profile cases have included the urgent judicial review challenge under s.120 of the Enterprise Act to the Secretary of State’s decision, in the context of the banking/financial crisis, not to refer the Lloyds/HBOS merger to competition commission.
Paul has appeared in many other leading Court of Appeal cases on public administrative/European law matters:
Robin Feakins (concerning direct applicability of EU derogations, and relevance of motive in judicial review)
Searby (concerning the ability of criminal defendants to run ‘Euro’ defences)
Taylor (Article 14 ECHR, and section 6 HRA 1998)
Feakins & Hawkins (express and implied statutory powers, direct effect, scope of Community interpretive obligations, trespass).
Paul has also appeared in the New Zealand High Court and Court of Appeal in a case concerning attempted publication and broadcast of materials by a former member of Her Majesty’s Special Forces.
Other recent public law issues include legitimate expectation (substantive and procedural), declarations against the State, express and implied powers, social security, false arrest and imprisonment, trespass, misfeasance in public office, agricultural tenancies, possession orders, debentures, unfair and wrongful dismissal, race and sex discrimination, injunctions (interlocutory and final).
Paul specialised in Human Rights law at Cambridge University and again as part of his LLM at Berkeley. Paul’s LLM thesis advocated the incorporation of the ECHR into UK domestic law and since the introduction of the Human Rights Act 1998, Paul’s practice has covered human rights litigation including, recently, Article 6 (right to a fair trial), Article 8 (private and family life), Article 10 (freedom of expression), Article 14 (prohibition of discrimination) and Article 1, Protocol 1 (protection of property rights).
Cases include Boughton (conscientious tax objectors case under Article 9), ex p. Jackson (Article 10 right to a public or other enquiry) and Taylor (Article 14 and meaning of “victim” under HRA).
Paul has a wealth of experience in relation to all aspects of regulatory judicial review.
Paul is a well-known Leader in the field of commercial competition litigation, currently/recently instructed in many of the highest value and profile proceedings in the country e.g. Mastercard – collective action (a Lawyer top 10 case; biggest ever UK damages action); Trucks Cartel (leading the defence for a major truck OEM); Agents’ Mutual v Gascoigne Halman (new property portal); Ecotricity v. Tesla Inc. – a Lawyer top 10 case for 2015 – (access of electric cars to UK motorway network); Unwired Planet v. Google & Samsung & Huawei (FRAND licensing and abusive injunctions); Emerald v. BA and ors (Air Cargo litigation); Newson v. IMI (Copper Cartel litigation); Pfizer v. Actavis (second medical use patents and foreclosure for non-patented indications); NHS v. Reckitt Benckiser (abuse of dominance re Gaviscon), as well as a number of other confidential matters concerning commercial restrictions in the field of professional sport and entertainment (movies and music), such as collective sales, exclusivity, salary caps, financial fair play, and broadcasting. Given the span of his work, the litigation encompasses all manner of other commercial issues, commonly including: jurisdiction; applicable law; limitation; all aspects of commercial contracts; conspiracy; scope of damages; unlawful interference; breach of confidence; inducement of breach of contract; causation; quantification of loss etc.
Paul’s practice continues to see a particular concentration where his true specialist expertise and experience in the fields of sports, entertainment, music and other media work overlap particularly, for example, as regards broadcasting/streaming (e.g. collective sales and purchasing) and joint ventures/projects etc.
Paul is also noted for his ability and experience in expedited litigation, often commenced with urgent interim relief applications of one kind or another.
In recent times, Paul has also been instructed in relation to issues such as industrial valves, floating oil rigs, cross-Channel wine trading, joint ventures, trade shows, pan-European software distribution, advertising, dominance on ferry and bus routes, essential facilities at ports/airports, corporate hospitality, wool production, paper and other merchandising distribution, broadcasting, discrimination, predatory pricing, excessive pricing, margin squeeze, cartel damages actions, real estate development, exclusivity, collectivity, objective necessity, and foreclosure.
Paul is vastly experienced in approaching and dealing with the CMA, and subsequent proceedings in the CAT- and in guiding clients through investigations and procedures, including ‘dawn raids’ and leniency. Paul has particular expertise in competition penalties and competition compliance and regularly provides (solicitor and/or client) seminars.
Further details of experience are available upon request.
Paul has extensive experience of many other areas of Community law in addition to competition– such as state aid and free movement and establishment – and appears regularly in the CJEU and General Court. Recent CJEU appearances have included animal health, customs valuation, tax, television broadcasting and intra-Community provision of services.
He is often instructed as a specialist Community law advocate in domestic litigation and arbitration. Familiar topics for Paul in High Court litigation include state aid, direct effect, Marleasing, emanations of the State, damages against the State, travaux preparatoires, abuse of rights, and Article 4TEU.
Recent cases in which he has been instructed that feature Community law include state aid in the context of football stadia (Olympic stadium, Portsmouth, Plymouth) parallel imports (of pesticides), broadcasting of designated events under the TV Without Frontiers Directive, application and interpretation of the Animal Waste Directive, the Veterinary Checks Directives, the Principal, Sixth and Eighth VAT Directives, the Excise Goods Directive, the Waste Framework Directive, the FMD Directives, the TSE Regulation, free movement rules (for sports professionals), wrongful dismissal by the European Commission, application and interpretation of the Customs Code, Euro defences to criminal proceedings, countervailing duties, Community law derogations, IP licensing and areas of harmonisation.
Other topical ECJ cases in which Paul appeared include RTL Television (application of the TV Without Frontiers Directive to films and soap operas), Tempelman (vires of European disease control legislation) and Bacardi (alcohol advertising at sports events).
11 Nov 2020Court of Appeal rules on abuse of process in competition damages claim
09 Oct 2020Court of Appeal Rules on Abuse of Process in Competition Damages Claim
Paul continues to be highly in demand as a sports law advocate. His success in leading the legal team for Manchester City FC in its appeal at CAS against the decision by UEFA to ban it from the Champions League for two seasons has cemented his position at the top of the sports law tree.
Chambers and Partners recognised Paul for many years as the number 1 ‘star’ sports law junior barrister in the UK, writing that: “…in terms of the sports market, [he] is already considered to be amongst the most luminous of the Bar’s leading lights. His elevated standing is affirmed by his case list, which includes some of the year’s biggest sports issues … sources believe Harris is “both an absolute A* practitioner intellectually, but also top-notch on the practical side of things, and a man who understands the nuances of a case.” Clients from within the sports industry are unequivocal in their praise: “Harris is a no-nonsense barrister who knows the sports industry intimately and understands exactly what sports people want.”.
More recently, directories have reported:
Sport: “Very commercial, understands the client’s needs, and is extremely user-friendly. He is extremely bright and a robust, competent advocate.” “An expert in his field and very, very experienced in sport.” – Chambers UK, 2020
Leading silk in Sport: ‘‘A very forceful and direct advocate.’’– Legal 500, 2020
“Hugely well regarded” in the sports space. He is described by peers as “a very bright and strong advocate”, and wins praise for his work on arbitration and litigation proceedings” – Sports, Who’s Who Legal UK Bar 2019
Sport: “A real sports expert.” “Excellent advocate and impressive clarity of thought in competition-related but also commercial matters.” “Extremely robust.” – Chambers UK, 2019
Paul is noted for his approachability and willingness to fight tenaciously for clients’ interests: “[Paul Harris] is ‘extremely bright, yet down-to-earth’ and reaps strong praise for his ‘considerable experience in sports law cases and familiarity with the Premier League and Football Association rules and regulations’.” Legal 500, 2011; “…[Paul produces] outstanding work and [has a] tireless work ethic.” Clients are particularly keen to laud his availability and commercial approach…”: Chambers and Partners 2010.
Paul has unparalleled experience before all varieties of sports forum, whether they be disciplinary, arbitral, High Court or European and has appeared in all manner of sports-specific tribunals including the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS), FIFA, UEFA, The FA, the FAPL, Sports Resolutions, Premier Rugby, 6Nations, Magners League, International Hockey, Formula 1 International Court of Appeal, the World Motor Sports Council, English Cricket Board, Amateur Swimming Association and so on. Paul’s write-up as a leading Litigator in The Lawyer “Hot 100” 2009 refers to his “…slew of sports cases, representing the Fédération Internationale de l’Automobile in the appeal hearing concerning Lewis Hamilton, representing West Ham United FC in its dispute with Sheffield United FC, as well as taking a role in the Carlos Tevez litigation.”.
More recently, Paul was described in The Times as Sports Barrister of the Year for his role in defending Mercedes GP in the ‘Tyregate’ affair, and has amassed more F1 advisory and litigation experience than any other barrister.
Recent sports disputes include:
Saracens RFC (2019, eligibility and salary cap issues)
League termination disputes related to Covid-19 issues
F1 driver remuneration disputes
F1 car design disputes
ICA appearance against Alfa Romeo (2019) relating to clutch control
ICA appearance for competitors in the LeMans 24hr race (2018) relating to refuelling
Olympic athlete selection disputes
Olympic (and Commonwealth Games) Team Member disputes
Application of London Olympic Association Right legislation
Application of ‘3 strikes and you are out’ doping rules to Olympic athletes
World Cup voting scandal (CAS) – FIFA Executive Committee Member found guilty of corruption
International Hockey dispute – international governing body arbitration panel
Netball New Zealand v. IFNA (CAS) – challenge to the decision on eligibility of a leading NZ netball player
Indian Cricket League v. BCCI & ors – dispute concerning the formation and operation of the ICL
adidas v. The LTA – High Court dispute about branding on tennis apparel during Grand Slams
The Renault ‘crashgate’ hearing before the WMSC involving Piquet Jnr and Briatore
Ospreys v. Magners League – rugby disciplinary panel hearing and appeal
Premier Rugby v. London Wasps (PR Panel) (alleged rule breaches from non-fulfilment of fixture)
The Formula 1 ‘budget cap’ and ‘breakaway’ dispute
Ferrari v. FIA & Brawn GP (International Court of Appeal) (“diffusers” appeal)
Ladbrokes etc. v. AMRAC (horse racing broadcasting) (Court of Appeal)
FIA v. Lewis Hamilton (motor racing)(International Court of Appeal)
Indian Cricket League (cricket)(ECB Appeal)
SuperAguri (motor racing) (High Court)
Bergamasco & Del Fava (rugby union)(6 Nations disciplinary)
Westminster Hospitality (rugby union)(High Court)
Shand & Others (swimming)(ASA disciplinary)
Recent football disputes include:
Manchester City FC v. UEFA (CAS, 2020)
Covid-19 league termination disputes (2020)
Championship club transfer and agency disputes
High profile dispute between a Premier League club and its former manager
Leeds United & Masimo Cellino v. The FA
Manchester City Women’s FC (eligibility dispute)
Kop Football & Broughton and others vs Hicks & Gillett and others (High Court)(acted for the Club in the dispute regarding the sale to Fenway Sports Group)
Bolton Wanderers FC v. Nicolas Anelka & others (High Court) (image rights dispute)
The Carlos Tevez Affair (FAPL Disciplinary and FA Arb. and CAS and High Court)
Adrian Mutu v. Chelsea FC (compensation for breach of contract, CAS appeal)
Luton Town FC v. The FA (FA) (transfer irregularities, points deduction)
Gabriel Heinze v. Manchester United FC (FAPL Arb)
The 2007 FA Football Agents Regulations
Manchester United v. Chelsea FC & Jon Obi Mikel (FIFA DRC)
Newcastle United v. The FA (Michael Owen)
Leeds United v. Chelsea FC & Worthington (Woods & Taiwo)(High Court)
Manchester City FC v. Joe Royle (Court of Appeal)
Crystal Palace FC v. Bradford City FC (FA Arb)
Burscough & others v. The FA (High Court)
Lindsay v. Manchester City FC and Kevin Keegan (FA Arb)
Leichtenstein v. Clube Atletico Mineiro (Gilberto Silva) (High Court)
Paul has also acted in other sports disputes relating to athletics, golf, basketball, boxing, ice hockey, A1GP racing, rugby league, swimming, greyhound racing, speedway racing and snooker – including in relation to issues such as ticketing, corporate hospitality, challenges to governing bodies, breakaway competitions, touting and other secondary ticketing, licensing, transfers, promotion, undue influence, duress, agency, disciplinary, corporate governance, sponsorship, advertising, branding, media rights, passing off, bias, salary cap and implied terms.
Paul is experienced in international sporting disputes; for instance, disputes about the operation of cricket and hockey in India.
Clients include clubs, governing bodies, national unions, leagues, agents, players, directors and commercial partners.
Paul is former Vice-Chairman of the British Association of Sport and Law (BASL) and co-author of two chapters (transfers, and relations with sports governing bodies) in Butterworths: Sport Law and Practice.
Sports, entertainment & media commercial & competition
Paul acts often in the niche fields of sport, entertainment and media commercial and competition, including, by way of examples, the following issues:
the ‘PAY TV’ dispute about the WMO remedy imposed by Ofcom upon Sky
brand and IP licensing and distribution
dominance of governing bodies
rights of teams to league participation
‘home grown’ player requirements
doping and doping sanctions
kit and equipment rules
valuation of rights – image and broadcasting
VAT & customs duties
Paul’s VAT and Customs practice is varied and extensive, both for and against HMRC. He is particularly active as advocate in contested High Court and Tax Tribunal work. Chambers & Partners states that “Paul Harris “always impresses” on VAT cases, consistently proving himself a “real fighter.”” He is known for his abilities both to roll up his sleeves and to handle difficult judges and opponents.
Paul has a wealth of VAT experience, both domestically and in the Court of Justice of the European Union, covering issues such as election to waive exemption/options to tax property,s.106 property planning gain agreements, single/multiple supplies, place of supply, time of supply, economic activity, avoidance, exemptions, territorial jurisdiction, charities, out of scope supplies, neutrality, distortions of competition, right to deduct, cost components, usual place of residence, intra-EC movements of goods, locus standi, excise diversion fraud, MTIC fraud, other carousel fraud, seizure and forfeiture of excise goods, partial exemption special methods, out of country supplies, debentures, general betting duty, abuse of rights, vouchers, penalties.
Recent sectors in relation to which Paul has advised and/or litigated include complex property transactions, including anti-avoidance measures, fiscal neutrality and zero-rating of supplies of manufactured goods, corporate frauds (dishonesty attribution to company, penalties, mitigation, proportionality), motor manufacturing (VAT period staggers, legislation and policy), insurance (economic and non-economic activities, right to deduct), supplies of car parking services, supplies of telecoms – supplies of computers (customs valuation of laptop computers) supplies of land development and architectural.
What the directories say
“Stands out as a “tough advocate” who is “absolutely brilliant in sport and competition cases.” – Competition, Who’s Who Legal UK Bar 2022
Recommended in Sports, Who’s Who Legal UK Bar 2022
Sport: “He is tough and extremely well prepared in court.” – Chambers UK, 2022
Competition Law: “If you want him to go to battle for a client he is fantastic – he will make the points very strongly.” “I think he is good at seeing the big-picture strategic points. Very good at understanding the dynamic of the cases and where the pressure points are – this is thanks to his experience. He has an adaptable style on his feet as well. He is excellent, approachable and open to new ideas.” “Paul is easy to work with; he is client-focused and personable.” – Chambers UK and Chambers Global, 2022
Leading silk in Competition: “Paul is one of the most tenacious advocates at the Bar. He is not afraid to take and argue a point that might not, at first blush, be hugely attractive to the court.” – Legal 500, 2022
Leading silk in Sport: “Head and shoulders the best sports lawyer at the Bar. A brave and effective strategist and a persuasive advocate.” – Legal 500, 2022
“The “tenacious” Paul Harris QC is celebrated for his “ability to get the heart of the key issues quickly” and his “strategic understanding of the big picture as well as the details”. – Competition, Who’s Who Legal Global Guide 2021
Recommended in Sports, Who’s Who Legal Global Guide 2021
Sport: “He is bright, engaging, very articulate and ferocious in cross-examination.” – Chambers UK, 2021
Competition Law: “He is very good at getting his boxing gloves out and going in to fight.” “He is good to have on your side when you’re backed into a corner.” – Chambers UK and Chambers Global, 2021
Leading silk in Competition: ‘‘An excellent choice for contentious sports matters, particularly those involving competition law issues.’’– Legal 500, 2021
Leading silk in Sport: ‘‘Very well-known. A top practitioner for good reason – super-committed, very energetic – you can see why he is busy and well-regarded. He really is in your corner in a way clients appreciate.’’– Legal 500, 2021
“Excels in a variety of sports matters, most notably high-value arbitration proceedings.” – Sports, Who’s Who Legal UK Bar 2020
Sport: “Very commercial, understands the client’s needs, and is extremely user-friendly. He is extremely bright and a robust, competent advocate.” “An expert in his field and very, very experienced in sport.” – Chambers UK, 2020
Competition Law: “A powerful advocate and a strong force in court.” “He narrows down the salient points and is forceful in his delivery of them.” “Clients completely rely on his advice and really value everything he says,” valuing the fact that he is “very clear-cut and direct.” – Chambers UK and Chambers Global, 2020
Leading silk in Competition: ‘‘Very pragmatic and straightforward.’’– Legal 500, 2020
Leading silk in Sport: ‘‘A very forceful and direct advocate.’’– Legal 500, 2020
“Receives recognition from respondents as “a very strong advocate in court” and “a standout on sports-related issues” – Competition, Who’s Who Legal UK Bar 2019
“Hugely well regarded” in the sports space. He is described by peers as “a very bright and strong advocate”, and wins praise for his work on arbitration and litigation proceedings” – Sports, Who’s Who Legal UK Bar 2019
Competition Law: “He is a very effective courtroom advocate,” and “knows his subject matter very well.” – Chambers UK and Chambers Global, 2019
Sport: “A real sports expert.” “Excellent advocate and impressive clarity of thought in competition-related but also commercial matters.” “Extremely robust.” – Chambers UK, 2019
Leading silk in Competition: ‘‘Hardworking, responsive and a forceful and aggressive advocate.’’– Legal 500, 2018
Leading silk in Sport: ‘‘A hardworking, responsive and forceful advocate.’’– Legal 500, 2018
Competition Law: “He is very good at getting on top of the detail and is a great cross-examiner who presents complex issues in a simple manner.” – Chambers UK, 2018
Sport: “He is very user-friendly and a real sport expert.” “He is a seriously bright lawyer.” “He exudes utter confidence and is extremely good with clients.” “He lives up to his reputation: a big hitter in the sport sector with vast competition law experience.” – Chambers UK, 2018
Leading silk in Competition: ‘‘Very knowledgeable and extremely able.’’– Legal 500, 2017
Competition: “He is very commercial and understands the client’s position. He is aggressive when he needs to be and can be very innovative as well.” – Chambers UK, 2017
Sport: “He’s incredibly bright and very good on his feet. A very forceful advocate, he doesn’t give up.” “He’s the doyen of competition law and competition sports work.” – Chambers UK, 2017
Leading silk in Commercial Litigation: “Exceptional for commercial litigation and competition advice.” – Legal 500, 2016
Leading silk in EU and Competition: “A ferocious litigator, who never fails to impress with his ability to take control.” – Legal 500, 2016
Leading silk in Sport: “Very authoritative, articulate and commercial.” – Legal 500, 2016
Competition: An “excellent advocate”, who is well-schooled in competition litigation. Peers add that “he is a dynamic and potent force in the courtroom.” – WHO’S WHO LEGAL (WWL) UK BAR 2016
Sports: Has “a very high-profile practice”, acting for clubs, governing bodies, leagues, agents, players and commercial partners, including sponsors and broadcasters. Sources appraise his level of knowledge and dedication to the field as “exemplary”. Clients also remark on his “responsiveness” and “unfussy” handling of complex matters. – WHO’S WHO LEGAL (WWL) UK BAR 2016
Competition Law: “Incredibly fearless, incisive and decisive.” “He is insightful and incredible both on his feet and also in preparation.” “His cross-examination was phenomenal and really persuasive.” – Chambers UK & Chambers Global, 2016
Sport: “He is very intelligent, responsive, and a real heavyweight advocate.” “He is a combative driving force who is good on detail and strategy.” – Chambers UK, 2016
Leading Silk in EU and Competition Law: ”Very approachable and client-friendly.” Legal 500, 2015
Leading Silk in Sports Law: ‘Very articulate, very easy to deal with and very effective.” Legal 500, 2015
Leading Silk in Commercial Litigation Law: ”An excellent commercial litigator.” Legal 500, 2015
Competition Law: “Like a one-man commando unit, he’s highly forceful in court.” “A great leader who is excellent on his feet; it’s always impressive to see him in action.” – Chambers UK, 2015
Sport: “He’s an extremely good sports lawyer who provides pithy, commercial advice.” – Chambers UK, 2015
‘He is particularly well known for disputes in the sports, media and telecoms sectors.’ Paul Harris QC is recommended as a leading silk in Commercial Litigation. Legal 500, 2014
‘Very bright and decisive.’ Paul Harris QC is recommended as a leading silk in Media, Entertainment & Sport and EU and Competition Law. Legal 500, 2014
Paul Harris QC is ranked in Band 1 under Sports Law. “He is very, very hard-working and well regarded, and has an effective style when it comes to clients.” “He is a force of nature; he’s very aggressive and goes for the jugular every time.” Chambers UK, 2014
Under Competition Law: He is a particularly popular choice as lead counsel in follow-on damages actions, not least because of his outstanding litigation skills. “An absolute delight to work with, he is incredibly clever and truly a litigators’ litigator.” “He is very good at devising a strategy.” Chambers UK, 2014
“Paul Harris QC of Monckton Chambers is fast becoming one of the silks of choice for sports advocacy. Peers agree that he is “a first-rate barrister who knows the sports industry inside-out and works very well with clients as a result.” Sports clients are keen to work further with a barrister who “speaks a language we understand; he has the appearance, he gets the strategy – when we’re loading the cannon for a hearing, we want him to fire it.”” Chambers UK, 2013
Under Media, Entertainment and Sport: “The ‘thorough and reliable’ Paul Harris QC successfully acted for the applicant in Brennan v Health Professionals Council, and represented several major sports bodies in their challenge to Ofcom’s decision to compel Sky to provide the Sky Sports 1 and 2 channels to other pay TV retailers.”- Legal 500, 2012
Paul Harris QC is recommended as a leading silk in EU and Competition Law. Legal 500, 2012
Paul Harris QC is recommended as a leading silk in Media, Entertainment and Sport Law. Legal 500, 2012
Under Competition/European Law, Paul Harris QC is “Commended for his expertise and skill, he is described by solicitors as “a fantastic street fighter in court.” He has been acting in the high-profile recruitment industry cartel case Hays Specialist Recruitment Ltd v Office of Fair Trading. – Chambers UK, 2012
Sports Law: “Well supported in the market is Paul Harris QC of Monckton Chambers. He may have only recently taken silk but, in terms of the sports market, is already considered to be amongst the most luminous of the Bar’s leading lights. His elevated standing is affirmed by his case list, which includes some of the year’s biggest sports issues … sources believe Harris is “both an absolute A* practitioner intellectually, but also top-notch on the practical side of things, and a man who understands the nuances of a case.” Clients from within the sports industry are unequivocal in their praise: “Harris is a no-nonsense barrister who knows the sports industry intimately and understands exactly what sports people want.” ” – Chambers UK, 2012
EU & Competition recommend Paul Harris QC as a leading silk. Legal 500, 2011
Media, Entertainment & Sport states that ‘new silk’ Paul Harris “is ‘extremely bright, yet down-to-earth’ and reaps strong praise for his ‘considerable experience in sports law cases and familiarity with the Premier League and Football Association rules and regulations’.” Legal 500, 2011
Tax: Corporate & VAT recommends “‘the high rated’ Paul Harris QC ‘who appeared in ERF v HMRC’.” Legal 500, 2011
Paul Harris is regarded as one of “chambers’ rising stars.” – Global Competition Review: Barrister Survey, 2011
Under Competition/European Law “Paul Harris wins recognition for his “diligence and consistently commercial advice.” “Impressively aggressive as conditions dictate,” he is not one to shirk the fight. Of late, he has acted in such cases as British Afternoon Greyhound Services v Amalgamated Racing” – Chambers UK, 2011
“Paul Harris of Monckton Chambers is another with a tremendous profile within the sports sector. He is frequently involved with sports cases from a competition angle, and draws praise for his advocacy style, which is “straight up and direct – he understands that you need to avoid the kind of pyrotechnics which some of his peers tend to use and which alienate sports tribunals.” ” – Chambers UK, 2011
Winner of the 2010 EU and Competition “Junior of the Year” – Chambers Bar Awards
Mastercard Incorporated and others v Walter Hugh Merricks CBE [2020] UKSC 51: a priceless victory for UK consumers in the Supreme Court
Rugby discipline in the time of coronavirus – a note on RFU v Barbarian FC players
Paul Harris QC – Merricks v Mastercard case featured in The Times, The Guardian, The Telegraph, BBC and The Lawyer
Merricks v Mastercard [2019] EWCA Civ 674: collective proceedings in competition law revitalised by the Court of Appeal
Bookmakers’ Afternoon Greyhound Services Limited v Amalgamated Racing Limited [2008] EWHC 1978 (Ch)
Barristers regulated by the Bar Standards Board.
Subscribe to get all our latest news straight to your inbox.
1 & 2 Raymond Buildings
Gray’s Inn, London WC1R 5NR [map]
Tel: +44 (0)20 7405 7211
Fax: +44 (0)20 7405 2084
"*" indicates required fields
Drop files here or Select files
Accepted file types: doc, docx, pdf, png, jpg, jpeg, Max. file size: 5 MB, Max. files: 8.
This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
© Monckton Chambers 2022. All rights reserved.
Websites for barristers by Square Eye Ltd.
Pro bono, community & environment
Slides, podcasts & recordings
EU Relations Law Blog
We use cookies to optimize our website and our service. Not consenting or withdrawing consent may adversely affect certain features and functions.
Functional Functional Always active
The technical storage or access is strictly necessary for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user, or for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network.
The technical storage or access is necessary for the legitimate purpose of storing preferences that are not requested by the subscriber or user.
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for statistical purposes. The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.
The technical storage or access is required to create user profiles to send advertising, or to track the user on a website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes.