Best Lawyers in Germany: Gleiss Lutz named Law Firm of the Year for Competition/Antitrust and Environmental law
In this year’s rankings for Handelsblatt U.S. publisher Best Lawyers has named Gleiss Lutz as law firm of the year for competition/antitrust and environmental law, making Gleiss Lutz one of the five law firms to receive the “Law Firm of the Year 2016” award in two practice areas. In addition to that, 12 Gleiss Lutz lawyers have been awarded the title of “Lawyer of the Year 2016”, meaning that Gleiss Lutz has collected more titles in this category than any other German law firm. Each year Best Lawyers awards this title to only one lawyer for each practice area and each geographic region:
─ Dr. Achim Dannecker, tax, Baden-Württemberg
─ Dr. Christian Cascante, M&A, Baden-Württemberg
─ Christian Steinke, corporate, Berlin
─ Dr. Eric Wagner, litigation, Baden-Württemberg
─ Prof. Dr. Hans Schlarmann, environmental, Baden-Württemberg
─ Dr. Ingo Brinker, competition/antitrust, Bavaria
─ Dr. Martin Diller, employment, Baden-Württemberg
─ Dr. Stefan Lingemann, employment, Hamburg
─ Dr. Stefan Rützel, litigation, Hesse
─ Dr. Stefan Völker, IP, Baden-Württemberg
─ Dr. Stefan Weidert, IT, Berlin
─ Dr. Steffen Krieger, corporate governance und compliance, North Rhine-Westphalia
In the national rankings “Best Lawyers in Germany 2016” Gleiss Lutz received 139 individual recommendations. Worthy of special note are the many individual recommendations in corporate advisory, M&A and employment, followed by, among others, banking, finance and capital markets, real estate, competition/antitrust, private equity, litigation, international arbitration, intellectual property, tax, energy, corporate governance and compliance, insurance, restructuring and insolvency, and healthcare.
Best Lawyers compiles the annual rankings exclusively for Handelsblatt based on a peer-to-peer survey. This peer review involves surveying legal professionals about the reputation of colleagues outside of their own law firm. The respondents are asked to indicate who they would recommend in the hypothetical case that they are themselves unable to take on a matter due to time constraints or a conflict of interests.