Rob Schultz

Rob has significant arbitration and international arbitration experience, including:

• Representing an Asia-based supplier of cloud computing and technology services in an arbitration arising out of an agreement with a South American mobile network operator under which the counterparty defaulted while asserting an obligation to continue service (AAA-ICDR, New York).
• Representing an energy supplier to the European market in relation to notified arbitration claims arising from several network supply agreements from network supply disruption. This included complex issues of contractual limitation of consequential loss, force majeure and sale of goods value (SIAC, Singapore).
• Representing an Asia-based trader of liquefied natural gas (LNG) in an arbitration concerning an agreement for the purchase and sale of LNG. The counterparty sought to avoid performance by claiming that changes in market conditions had frustrated the purpose of the agreement (ICC, New York).
• Appearing as sole counsel against a senior King’s Counsel to successfully opposed application for leave to appeal against an arbitral award to the High Court of New Zealand for errors of law under the Arbitration Act 1996. Decision reported in New Zealand’s official law reports (Wai-o-tapu Limited Partnership v Ngati Tahu Trust [2017] NZHC 2597, [2018] 2 NZLR 808).
• Appearing as junior counsel in a range of New Zealand commercial arbitral proceedings (including multi-week trial-format hearings) before sole arbitrators and arbitral tribunals, principally consisting of senior retired High Court judges.

At Hausfeld, Rob is part of the legal teams acting on:

• A claim 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 has unfairly restricted 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.  The claim alleges that Google’s conduct violates section 18 of the UK Competition Act 1998 and Article 102 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.
• A claim on behalf an estimated 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, Rob was part of the legal team representing Alex Neill Class Representative Limited in a claim on behalf of some 9 million UK consumers in opt-out class action proceedings. The claim alleges competition abuses surrounding Sony’s exclusive control of the PlayStation network and store and was the firms class claim to be certified following the Supreme Court funding decision in PACCAR ([2023] CAT 87).

Rob has significant commercial litigation experience gained in the UK and New Zealand prior to joining Hausfeld, including:

• Advising a UK-headquartered international development bank in relation to its rights under an English law shareholders’ agreement to exit an investment (raising complex issues of illegality and conflict of laws).
• Advising a UK company in relation to satisfaction of conditions and disputes concerning contributions due in relation to a renewable energy joint venture project.
• Acting in a range of enforcement proceedings for New Zealand registered bank Heartland Bank (formerly MARAC Finance).
• Acting in construction and insolvency proceedings with leading construction and insolvency silk David Chisholm KC.
• Acting in a range of trust and relationship property proceedings working with leading relationship property silk Lady Deborah Chambers KC.
• Acting as junior counsel in an eight-week trial concerning reckless trading and other claims by liquidators for NZ$75m brought against the directors of historic New Zealand construction company Mainzeal (Mainzeal Property and Construction Limited (in liq) v Yan [2019] NZHC 255 (appealed to the Supreme Court of New Zealand ([2023] NZSC 113)).