Anna Stellardi

At Hausfeld, Anna was part of the team which:

• Filed an opt-out collective action with the CAT on behalf of an estimated 19.5 million eligible UK users of smartphones and tablets running on Google’s Android operating system relating to excessive and unlawful charges on purchase in the Google Play App Store. The claim alleges that Google unfairly restricts consumers from accessing potential competition from other app distributors, by requiring smartphone manufacturers to pre-install a bundle of Google’s proprietary apps and services including the Google Play Store as well as imposing other contractual and technical restrictions.
• Filed a representative collective action with the CAT on behalf of some 19.6 million eligible UK iPhone and iPad users relating to excessive and unlawful charges by the Apple App Store. The claim alleges that Apple’s conduct violates section 18 of the UK Competition Act 1998 and Article 102 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.

Prior to joining Hausfeld:

• Represented two Defendants in a very high-value competition claim brought by Phones 4U against several mobile network operators.
• Represented a Defendant in respect of a follow-on damages claim concerning the cathode ray tubes glass cartel.
• Advised a fintech start-up in connection with a potential stand-alone claim against an established market player.

• Represented two Claimants in a high-profile civil fraud claim worth hundreds of millions in USD.
• Assisted with several smaller commercial disputes arising in the telecommunications sector.

Anna has consistently sought out pro bono opportunities and her help has made a real difference to her pro-bono clients. Her work includes:

• Co-leading a team that successfully obtained four interim non-molestation zonal orders and an occupation order in the context of a complicated domestic abuse case.
• Obtaining a non-molestation zonal order in the context of a domestic abuse case.
• Successfully advocating before the Social Security Tribunal with the result that the client’s Employment and Support Allowance appeal was allowed.