Articles

Bonus Prohibition Bill-Update

Bonus Prohibition Bill-Update

Bonus Prohibition Bill-Update

17.02.2012 NL law

1.  Bonus Prohibition Bill - Update

On Tuesday 14 February 2012, the Lower House (Tweede Kamer) adopted the Bill on the limitation of liability of the DNB and the AFM and the introduction of a bonus prohibition for State supported institutions, including several amendments.

Current status
The modified Bill in which the adopted amendments have been incorporated will now be sent to the Senate (Eerste Kamer). The date on which the Bill will enter into force is not yet known, but this is expected to happen shortly.

Key changes to the Bill
On 6 and 7 February 2012, six amendments have been discussed in the Lower House. As a result of the adoption of the amendments the Bill now has a wider scope. Please click here to view the modified Bill including the explanatory notes to the amendments.
 
Managing directors or policymakers
One amendment extended the scope of the Bill to persons who determine the day-to-day policy (dagelijks beleidsbepalers) of the financial institution instead of limiting it to formal board members (bestuurders) only. This amendment however only applies to financial institutions that received or will receive state support after 7 February 2012. For financial institutions that received state support prior to this date the prohibition only applies to 'managing directors' instead of 'policy makers'.

State participations
The scope of the bonus prohibition is also extended to financial institutions that do not receive state support within the meaning of section 107 of the EU Treaty, but which are directly or indirectly held by the Dutch State.

20 percent increase
Discussions have taken place on the question whether a one-time increase of the fixed salary of managing directors should be allowed. The Bill now provides for a possibility of a maximum increase of the fixed salary of 20 percent on an individual basis during the period as from 26 October 2011 up to the date the Bill becomes law, provided that this increase is subject to all other restrictions that may apply with respect to executive compensation. During the debate, the Minister has mentioned that the maximum increase is appropriate and fits in the context of the Bill.

We also refer to our December alert in relation to the extension of the scope of the Bill to Dutch subsidiaries of foreign financial institutions that have received state support within the meaning of section 107 of the EU Treaty.

For more information, please do not hesitate to contact us. Obviously, we shall keep you posted of any relevant developments.

Team

Related news

06.02.2020 NL law
Pay-for-delay: brightened lines between object and effect restrictions

Short Reads - In its first pay-for-delay case, the ECJ has clarified the criteria determining whether settlement agreements between a patent holder of a pharmaceutical product and a generic manufacturer may have as their object or effect to restrict EU competition law. The judgment confirms the General Court’s earlier rulings in Lundbeck and Servier (see our October 2016 and December 2018 newsletters) in which it was held that pay-for-delay agreements (in these cases) constituted a restriction ‘by object’.

Read more

06.02.2020 NL law
Consumers and Sustainability: 2020 competition enforcement buzzwords

Short Reads - The ACM will include the effects of mergers on labour conditions in its review. It will also investigate excessive pricing of prescription drugs. As well as these topics, the ACM has designated the digital economy and energy transition as its 2020 focus areas. Companies can therefore expect increased enforcement to protect online consumers, and active probing of algorithms.

Read more

06.02.2020 NL law
The ACM may cast the net wide in cartel investigations

Short Reads - Companies beware: the ACM may not need to specify the scope of its investigation into suspected cartel infringements in as much detail as expected. On 14 January 2020, the Dutch Trade and Industry Appeals Tribunal upheld the ACM’s appeal against judgments of the Rotterdam District Court, which had quashed cartel fines imposed on cold storage operators. The operators had argued that the ACM was time-barred from pursuing a case against them, because the ACM had not suspended the prescription period by beginning investigative actions specifically related to the alleged infringements.

Read more

06.02.2020 NL law
Den Bosch Court of Appeal revives damages claims in Dutch prestressing steel litigation

Short Reads - On 28 January 2020, the Court of Appeal of Den Bosch issued a ruling in the Dutch prestressing steel litigation. In its ruling, the Court of Appeal overturned a 2016 judgment of the District Court of Limburg, in which it was held that civil damages claims brought by Deutsche Bahn were time-barred under German law (see our January 2017 newsletter).

Read more

06.02.2020 NL law
CDC/Kemira: Amsterdam Court of Appeal applies European principle of effectiveness to limitation periods

Short Reads - In a private enforcement case brought by CDC against Kemira, the Amsterdam Court of Appeal applies the European principle of effectiveness and rules that claims are not time-barred under Spanish, Finnish and Swedish law. With reference to the Cogeco judgment of the ECJ, the Court considers that claimants must be able to await the outcome of any administrative appeal against an infringement decision, even in relation to respondents who themselves have not filed appeals against the infringement decision.

Read more

This website uses cookies. Some of these cookies are essential for the technical functioning of our website and you cannot disable these cookies if you want to read our website. We also use functional cookies to ensure the website functions properly and analytical cookies to personalise content and to analyse our traffic. You can either accept or refuse these functional and analytical cookies.

Privacy – en cookieverklaring