Trends

Stibbe hosted a meeting of the Dutch association of company lawyers (NGB)

Stibbe hosted a meeting of the Dutch association of company lawyers (NGB)

16.10.2016 NL law

In cooperation with the Dutch association of company lawyers Stibbe hosted a  meeting with the topic Insolvency. Illustrated by several practical cases, the lawyers of Stibbe discussed the most relevant developments of bankruptcy law. 

The insolvency seminar started with a presentation of Job van Hooff and Daisy Nijkamp.

Job van Hooff and Daisy Nijkamp, Stibbe: “We really enjoyed providing the varied group of NGB members tips and tricks on contracting from an insolvency law perspective and what to do when a company gets into financial difficulties.”

Pre-pack

In the second part of the seminar Toni van Hees and Robbert Jan van der Weijden talked about the developments including pre-pack. With the so-called pre-pack, the court will be approached and asked to appoint the trustee as a silent administrator before the bankruptcy is filed. With aid of the silent administrator, a restart can be prepared peacefully. And when the insolvency is declared, a restart can be implemented immediately.

Toni van Hees and Robbert Jan van der Weijden, Stibbe: “A lot of developments take place in Dutch insolvency legislation including the introduction of the pre-pack in the Bankruptcy Act which could not be left undiscussed during a seminar for the NGB members with the topic ‘Insolvency’.”

Overhandiging reeks V - Insolventierecht

Next to the presentation, the Dutch association of company lawyers
presented series V about insolvency and restructuring written by the Stibbe (Job van Hooff, Toni van Hees, Daisy Nijkamp, Robbert Jan van der Weijden, Reinout de Boer, Marieke Palstra, Derek Sietses, Thijs Oosterink and Tirza Cramwinckel).  All members of the NGB will receive this special edition.
 
Arnold Brakel, NGB-Chairman: "Stibbe has written series V of the NGB series about insolvency. A practical booklet full of tips and tricks. It will undoubtedly provide our members with tools in their work. We are happy with it."
 

Team

Related news

23.02.2018 NL law
Can acts and statements from an unauthorised representative qualify as acknowledgment of liability and interrupt a limitation period?

Short Reads - On 26 January 2018, the Supreme Court delivered a judgment (ECLI:NL:HR:2018:108) about the interruption of the limitation period for a claim for damages. The key element in this case was whether the acts and statements of an insurer and a loss adjuster qualified as an acknowledgement of liability and, if so, whether this acknowledgement could be attributed to the liable party

Read more

10.01.2018 NL law
Fire, furniture and strict liability for buildings used for business

Short Reads - Persons using a building in the course of running a business might be liable for damage caused by a defect in the building on the basis of strict liability. Such liability exists if there is a link between the origin of the defect and the running of the business. In its decision of 24 November 2017 (ECLI:NL:HR:2017:3016), the Dutch Supreme Court clarified how to ascertain whether there is such a link.

Read more

21.02.2018 NL law
Termination clauses in agreements and Dutch standards of reasonableness and fairness

Short Reads - How can a party terminate an agreement? With the exception of certain specific agreements (i.e. employment or rent), the Dutch Civil Code (DCC) does not provide rules on termination as such. Whether and under what conditions a party is entitled to terminate an agreement is determined by the agreement itself and the general standards of reasonableness and fairness ("redelijkheid en billijkheid") in Article 6:248 DCC. In its decision of 2 February 2018 (ECLI:NL:HR:2018:141), the Dutch Supreme Court further developed its case law on the subject matter.

Read more

11.01.2018 NL law
Witness examination and the withdrawal of a judge

Short Reads - In its decision of 24 November 2017 (ECLI:NL:HR:2017:3016), the Dutch Supreme Court confirmed that a judge is allowed to critically interrogate a witness and remind a witness of his oath. Such action is not an indication that a judge is not impartial or independent.

Read more

Our website uses cookies: third party analytics cookies to best adapt our website to your needs & cookies to enable social media functionalities. For more information on the use of cookies, please check our Privacy and Cookie Policy. Please note that you can change your cookie opt-ins at any time via your browser settings.

Privacy and Cookie Policy