Is er na het verwachte oordeel in de Cartesio-zaak nog behoefte aan een veertiende vennootschapsrichtlijn? Een mogelijke afronding van het Europese vennootschapsrecht

Contains fulltext : 160789.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access)8 p

Beyond Tulips and Cheese: Exporting Mass Securities Claim Settlements from the Netherlands

With the enactment of the 2005 Collective Settlement of Mass Damage Act (WCAM 2005) the Dutch legal system and indeed Dutch society has taken a significant step towards a more efficient resolution of mass damage claims. The WCAM 2005 seems especially promising for attaining relatively swift settlement of mass securities claims in the Dutch context. Since, however, stock traded on the Amsterdam exchange is not exclusively owned by shareholders resident in The Netherlands, the obvious question is to what extent settlements under the WCAM 2005 have cross-border effect. Against this background, this paper has a twofold purpose. First, we aim at providing a general outline of the Dutch legal system concerning the collective settlement of mass damage claims. Secondly, we discuss issues of international jurisdiction, cross-border recognition, res judicata and enforcement of opt-out securities settlements under the WCAM 2005. Have the Dutch found a new export product with the enactment of the WCAM 2005

Beyond Tulips and Cheese: Exporting Mass Securities Claim Settlements from the Netherlands

With the enactment of the 2005 Collective Settlement of Mass Damage Act (WCAM 2005) the Dutch legal system and indeed Dutch society has taken a significant step towards a more efficient resolution of mass damage claims. The WCAM 2005 seems especially promising for attaining relatively swift settlement of mass securities claims in the Dutch context. Since, however, stock traded on the Amsterdam exchange is not exclusively owned by shareholders resident in The Netherlands, the obvious question is to what extent settlements under the WCAM 2005 have cross-border effect. Against this background, this paper has a twofold purpose. First, we aim at providing a general outline of the Dutch legal system concerning the collective settlement of mass damage claims. Secondly, we discuss issues of international jurisdiction, cross-border recognition, res judicata and enforcement of opt-out securities settlements under the WCAM 2005. Have the Dutch found a new export product with the enactment of the WCAM 2005

The Administrative Board of Review of the European Central Bank: Experience After 2 Years

This article examines the administrative remedy provided by the Administrative Board of Review (ABoR) of the European Central Bank (ECB), as part of the broader issue of the right of defence of natural and legal persons vis-à-vis ECB supervisory decisions within the Single Supervisory Mechanism (SSM). After presenting an overview of the review panels established in the financial sector in the EU, the article describes the experience with the ABoR by analysing its composition, its mandate and scope of review, the main procedural aspects and the relationship with judicial proceedings before the European Court of Justice. Particular attention is given to the substantial issues dealt with by the ABoR in its Opinions and to some of the major challenges faced in the first 2 years of practice. Among them is the assessment of the correct application of national laws implementing EU legislation by the ECB. The paper identifies two aspects giving particular cause for concern and requiring legislative reforms: (1) the assessment of the suitability of the members of management bodies (fit and proper assessment) and (2) the inclusion of bank holding companies within the scope of banking supervision