Client Case Partners Date

Norwegian Air Shuttle ASA (NAS) and Norwegian Air BAHR successfully represented ASA and Tarjei Thorkildsen 25.01.2018 AS (NAN) in a dispute in the Appeal Court against certain pilots and cabin crew members claiming to be employed by said parent and operative subsidiary company in the Norwegian group. The main question was whether the business model of the Norwegian group is based on acquisition of services or if it is based on staff hire.

Sunrise Medical AS BAHR assisted Sunrise Medical in a preliminary injunction Beret Sundet 07.07.2017 regarding a competitive tender, in which Sunrise Medical was rejected.

Building Owner BAHR represented a Norwegian builder in a eight weeks Øystein Myre Bremset 07.07.2016 arbitration against a foreign contractor in a final settlement- dispute. Jan Einar Barbo

Pangea Property Partners AS BAHR successfully represented Pangea Property Partners AS in Are Stenvik 27.09.2016 the Supreme Court in a case regarding whether the company name violated a previous registered company name.

Mongstad Terminal DA/Statoil Refining Norway AS BAHR successfully represented two companies in the Court of Jan B. Jansen 21.10.2016 Appeal against the tax authorities regarding the tax treatment of two production facilities at Mongstad (a petroleum refinery Frode Talmo plant).

#7665033/1 1 (7)

Client Case Partners Date

Shipowner BAHR represented a shipowner in arbitral proceedings against Atle J. Skaldebø-Rød 01.11.2016 the Norwegian Was Risk Insurance Company. The dispute concerned whether the insured’s loss, which was due to the detention of a vessel in Nigeria, was covered by the War Risk Insurance.

Nordea Bank Finland Plc BAHR represented Nordea Bank Finland Plc in a dispute Arne Tjaum 15.11.2016 regarding whether a forward interest swap-agreement should be set aside/revised due to the bank not fulfilling its duty of information.

Evry Norge AS BAHR represented EVRY in the Court of Appeal in a dispute Atle J. Skaldebø-Rød 28.11.2016 with Entra ASA regarding Entra’s obligation to support a Datacentre project in which EVRY was to be the main tenant.

Rainpower AS, Rainpower Norge AS and Rainpower BAHR represented Rainpower in proceedings initiated by Jon Christian Thaulow 12.12.2016 Technology AS Andritz Hydro GmbH, Andritz Hydro As, Andritz AG regarding alleged breaches of the Marketing Practices Act and compensation claims relating to Rainpower’s alleged illegal use of Andritz’ knowhow and business secrets. Rainpower was fully acquitted and awarded legal costs.

Norwegian Hull Club - Gjensidig Assuranseforening BAHR represents Norwegian Hull Club – Gjensidig Tarjei Thorkildsen 05.01.2017 Assuranseforening in the Court of Appeal against Suez Fortune Investments Ltd, which claimed payment under the insurance for loss of time.

#7665033/1 2 (7)

Client Case Partners Date

Norsk Flygerforbund BAHR successfully represented two third party intervenors Tarjei Thorkildsen 02.02.2017 (the Confederation of Norwegian Business and Industry (NHO) and Norsk Flygerforbund) in a case regarding claim for damages for age discrimination in the Supreme Court.

ENGIE E&P Norge AS BAHR successfully represented ENGIE E&P Norge AS in the Tarjei Thorkildsen 17.03.2017 Court of Appeal in a dispute regarding the legality of an alteration of the employees’ pension scheme from defined benefit scheme to a defined contribution scheme.

Ole Robert Reitan and Monica Tønnesen Reitan BAHR successfully represented the Reitan family in the Øystein Myre Bremset 23.03.2017 Supreme Court regarding a final settlement-dispute with a contractor, and whether the contractor was entitled to payment in excess of the price estimate.

Argentum Fondsinvesteringer as m.fl. BAHR successfully represented Argentum and others in the Peter Hammerich 2018 Supreme court in a case regarding tax deduction for management fee paid by private equity funds to managers/advisors.

BAHR represented a Norwegian bank in arbitration 2017 Norwegian Bank proceedings regarding whether a foreign bank was required to Atle J. Skaldebø-Rød repay two subordinated loans granted by the Norwegian bank.

#7665033/1 3 (7)

Client Case Partners Date

BAHR represented a P&I-insurer in an arbitration against a 28.06.2017 P&I-insurer member claiming cover for losses due to “idle fines” issued by a private port operator whilst the member’s vessel was Atle J. Skaldebø-Rød arrested in Nigeria under suspicion of cargo on board being intended for use by a terrorist organisation, as well as costs for alleged sue and labour.

Nordic Trustee BAHR represented Nordic Trustee in the Court of Appeal Atle J. Skaldebø-Rød 18.01.2018 against former directors of the board and CEO of Thule Drilling, claiming compensation for loss and damage inflicted Karstein J. Espelid on security interests.

BAHR represented Bogstadveien 27B in the Supreme Court in Øystein Myre Bremseth 14.11.2017 Bogstadveien 27B AS a case regarding annulment of first refusal in a ground lease contract.

BAHR represented the Aukrust Foundation in the Supreme Are Stenvik 15.11.2017 Aukruststiftelsen Court against the Caprino Filmcenter concerning the rights to the intellectual property of the car “Il Tempo Gigante, on which the movie “Flåklypa Grand Prix” is based upon.

BAHR represented P4 and Bauer Media in a preliminary Lars G. Norheim January 2018 P4 and Bauer injunction against other radio channels regarding the continued broadcasting of radio shows over the FM network past the date for which all commercial FM radio broadcasting was to cease.

#7665033/1 4 (7)

Client Case Partners Date

Bergen Sentrum Tomteselskap AS BAHR represented Bergen Sentrum Tomteselskap AS against Sam E. Harris 12.12.217 Zachariasbryggen in the Supreme Court in a case concerning the question of determining remuneration principles in ground lease contracts

Westcon Yards AS BAHR represented Westcon Yards AS in a dispute with Prosafe Jan Einar Barbo 2018 Rigs Pte Ltd in a final settlement-dispute after the conversion of Prosafe’s rig “Safe Scandinavia”.

Torghatten Nord AS BAHR represented Torghatten Nord AS in a dispute with Gunnar Sørlie 2018 Gdansk Shiprepair Yard “Remontowa” where an arbitration award was partially set aside as invalid by the District Geir Gustavson Court. The arbitration award concerned a shipyard’s liability in relation to four shipbuilding contracts.

Statoil ASA BAHR represents Statoil in a significant patent dispute against Are Stenvik 2018 Neodrill regarding oil and gas well technology. Gunnar Sørlie

Genentech BAHR represented Genentech Inc. in an important patent Are Stenvik [Dato] dispute regarding the validity of a patent application regarding a combined treatment regime for breast cancer.

Gilead BAHR represents Gilead in its claim for the revocation of a Are Stenvik [Dato] patent held by Idenix. Both parties have applied for patents related to pharmaceuticals to treat the Hepatitis C virus, and have patents on compounds for its treatment.

#7665033/1 5 (7)

Client Case Partners Date

Biogen, INC. BAHR acted for Biogen in an invalidity case concerning a Are Stenvik [Dato] therapeutic regimen for the biological drug rituximab. The patent was challenged by two producers of biosimilars, Celltrion and Sandoz.

Skuld BAHR currently represents Skuld in an ongoing litigation Atle J. Skaldebø-Rød 2018 concerning the statute of limitation applicable to direct actions against the insurer of an insolvent assured. The direct action claim against Skuld is brought by the charterer of a vessel for losses sustained due to a ship collision in the Far East caused by Skuld’s member (the vessel’s sub-charterer) who was in breach of the charter party’s safe port warranty.

Industry Client BAHR defended an industry client in arbitral proceedings Atle J. Skaldebø-Rød 28.03.2017 against a claim in excess of MNOK 100 based on revision of a SPA.

Solveig Gas Norway AS BAHR represents three of the investors in Gassled, the Jan B. Jansen 2018 infrastructure for transportation and processing of gas on the Norwegian continental shelf, in the Supreme Court. The Thomas K. Svensen dispute is against the Norwegian state regarding the validity of tariff reductions.

Color Line BAHR represents Color Line in a dispute against Nye Kystlink Gunnar Sørlie 2018 AS regarding a claim for compensation based on Color Line’s alleged breach of competition law. The Court of Appeal has Helge Stemshaug submitted a separate question regarding limitation periods to the EFTA Court for a preliminary reference.

#7665033/1 6 (7)

Client Case Partners Date

Jessheim Byutvikling/Veikdekke Industri AS BAHR represented two private land owners in a Supreme Sam E. Harris [Dato] Court case against the Government, in order to decide the correct legal interpretation of a provision in the Norwegian Zoning and Building Act regarding the appreciation of property value as a result of publicly funded infrastructure works.

Oil major BAHR acted for an oil major in a dispute concerning the Thomas K. Svensen [Dato] complex area of long-term gas sales contracts. The case was settled in December 2017.

Arbeidsgiverforeningen Spekter BAHR successfully represented Arbeidsgiverforeningen Tarjei Thorkildsen 06.03.2018 Spekter in the Labour Court in a dispute against LO regarding whether a requirement of 20% of a full position for membership in a pension scheme was discriminatory towards part time employees, alternatively a breach of the collective bargaining agreement.

Nordea Bank Norge ASA BAHR represented Nordea against a borrower who took legal Arne Tjaum 27.02.2018 action for alleged negligent consultancy in connection with a loan of Swiss francs. The Court of Appeal came to the conclusion that Nordea had given satisfactory information about the risks.

#7665033/1 7 (7)