15 June 2017: Seminar “What does your organization know?"

Seminar

15 June 2017: Seminar “What does your organization know?"

24.05.2017 NL law

The increased digitization of communication makes it more difficult to keep track of information that enters a company. Whether the incoming information reaches the right employees often depends on chance. But sharing or not sharing certain information can have far-reaching legal consequences.

Even if there is an understandable explanation why, for instance, important information about a customer doesn’t reach the right department, the organization as a whole may still be deemed to have the knowledge at hand – and may be expected to act on it. Not responding to an unsolicited email may constitute an infringement of the cartel prohibition, which may result in very large fines being imposed. An innocent slip of the tongue about developments at a listed company can expose organizations to penalties due to the use of inside information. To create awareness of these types of risks, Stibbe will host a seminar about dissemination and protection of information within organizations: "What does your organization know?"

Programme:

Opening by Lineke Sneller, Professor in IT Value at Nyenrode Business University and member of the supervisory board at Achmea, ProRail, CCV and other companies.
Which knowledge of employees is attributed to companies? – Branda Katan, Lawyer and specialist in Commercial Litigation at Stibbe. Branda recently finished a PhD on this topic.
How do companies prevent competition law fines as a result of receiving market information? - Floris ten Have, Lawyer and expert in Competition Law at Stibbe.
When does an organization have inside information? - Professor Daan Doorenbos, Lawyer and expert in Corporate Crime at Stibbe.
How can an (investigative) authority or other party specifically determine which documents and information are held by the company? - Kevin Strooy, Senior Forensic IT Expert at Fox-IT.
Close and drinks

This seminar is free. To attend or for more information, please send an email to: StibbeEvents@Stibbe.com.

When: 15 June 2017 from 14.30 -17.00.

Where: Stibbe office: Beethovenplein 10 – Amsterdam.

Kindly note the seminar will be held in Dutch.

Team

Related news

08.04.2021 NL law

Third-party effect of exoneration clauses in commercial contracts

Short Reads - Under Dutch law, the general principle is that contracts only have legal effects for the contracting parties themselves. In principle, contracts have no legal effects for third parties. If contracting parties agree on exoneration clauses in commercial contracts, the exoneration clauses will thus only have legal effects between those parties.

Cathrien van Bunningen Amsterdam

01.04.2021 NL law

ECJ in Pometon: beware of too much info in staggered hybrid proceedings

Short Reads - In hybrid cartel proceedings (in which one party opts out of settlement), settlement decisions should not pre-judge the outcome of the Commission's investigation into non-settling parties. When the Commission publishes the settlement decision before the decision imposing a fine on the non-settling party, it must be careful in its drafting, the European Court of Justice confirmed. Furthermore, differences in the fining methodology applied to (similarly placed) settling and non-settling parties will have to be objectively justified and sufficiently reasoned.

Team: Marina Chernenko, Simone Evans

01.04.2021 NL law

Slovak Telekom: ECJ on essentials of the ‘essential facilities’ doctrine

Short Reads - Only dominant companies with a “genuinely tight grip” on the market can be forced to grant rivals access to their infrastructure. According to the ECJ’s rulings in Slovak Telekom and Deutsche Telekom, it is only in this scenario that the question of indispensability of the access for rivals comes into play. In the assessment of practices other than access refusal, indispensability may be indicative of a potential abuse of a dominant position, but is not a required condition.

Team: Floris ten Have, Simone Evans

01.04.2021 NL law

Collective action stopped due to lack of benefit for class members

Short Reads - On 9 December 2020, the Amsterdam District Court (the “Court”) declared a foundation inadmissible in a collective action regarding alleged manipulation of LIBOR, EURIBOR and other interest rate benchmarks. The foundation sought declaratory judgments that Rabobank, UBS, Lloyds Bank and ICAP (the “defendants”) had engaged in wrongful conduct and unjust enrichment vis-à-vis the class members.

Team: Jeroen Kortmann, Kaj Privé

01.04.2021 NL law

Pay-for-delay saga ends with nothing new; but pharma quest continues

Short Reads - On 25 March 2021, the ECJ ended the Lundbeck pay-for-delay saga by dismissing the appeals from Lundbeck and five generic manufacturers against a European Commission ‘pay-for-delay’ decision. Following its recent Paroxetine judgment, the ECJ found that Lundbeck’s process patents did not preclude generic companies being viewed as potential competitors, particularly since the patents did not represent an insurmountable barrier to entry. In addition, the patent settlement agreements constituted infringements "by object".

Team: Floris ten Have, Maria Cabrera

01.04.2021 NL law

Court bundles educational publishers merger off to ACM for reassessment

Short Reads - Digital mergers have steered competition authorities away from their usual mantra of structural over behavioural remedies. The Rotterdam District Court recently gave its blessing to the ACM’s remedies for securing access to a digital school platform. This behavioural approach could become more common, particularly when dealing with the ACM.

Team: Floris ten Have, Simone Evans