News & media

The prohibition on abuse of economic dependence entered into force on 22 August of last year. The anticipated impact on practice was widely discussed. This article summarises the developments so far.

Under Belgian law, legal entities act through their governing bodies. Directors, as members of these governing bodies, are not personally liable for the obligations of the company. However, they are accountable to the company for faults committed in the performance of their task, and they are, in certain circumstances, also accountable to third parties. In this way, directors can become either civilly or criminally liable.

A recent summary judgment by the President of the Brussels Labour Court illustrates that the Covid-19 pandemic can have particularly harmful consequences in the context of outsourcing contracts. This judgment also underlines the importance of complying with the procedure of information and consultation in the event of a transfer of undertaking.

Mediation, Communication and Coaching (MCC) @Deloitte Legal offers services in constructive conflict management, communication and the development of personal and professional skills (human skill development). The Deloitte professionals at MCC are experts in negotiation & mediation, conflict management, communication, coaching and group dynamics. They serve clients and offer workshops related to these topics, both inhouse and for external parties. In this blog, we hope to illustrate how MCC @Deloitte Legal can support you and your clients.

According to the CJEU, the use of an objective and reasonable system for the recognition of dockworkers to guarantee safety in ports does not infringe the freedom of establishment, the free movement of workers or the free movement of services. Nevertheless, certain elements of the Belgian system contrast with an objective recognition procedure (the composition of the administrative commission and the absence of a reasonable time limit) or are, in some cases, superfluous to the objective. E.g. the fact that workers who are not included in the pool have to reapply for recognition after every (even short-term) employment contract.

Flexibilisation of judicial reorganisation: a useful tool or a vain attempt to support enterprises in times of crisis?

Background: the moratorium

Given the major impact of COVID-19 on the European economy, a reaction from the European Commission on the state aid front was expected. Almost a year ago, on March 19, 2020, the European Commission adopted a Temporary Framework to enable Member States to support the economy in the COVID-19 outbreak. These measures complement many other possibilities under the existing state aid rules as outlined by the Commission in its Communication on a coordinated economic response to the COVID-19 outbreak. As of March 1, 2021, the Commission has adopted over 400 COVID-19 state aid decisions approving national support mechanisms for a total value exceeding €3 trillion.

In 2019, the European Commission alone spent more than €3 billion on public procurement. The contracts of the European institutions are therefore opportunities to be seized. Only few companies are familiar though with the specific legal regime that applies to the conclusion and execution of public contracts of the European institutions. In this article, we highlight certain differences from (Belgian) national public procurement law and provide practical advice to help you engage in tendering for European institutions with confidence.

With a global environment characterised by regulatory change and a growing emphasis on multi-jurisdictional scrutiny and transparency by regulators, stakeholders and investors, effective entity management is entering the public domain.

As cybersecurity has become a boardroom topic, legal professionals need to be informed about the corresponding legal risks in order to understand and assess their organization’s exposure, maturity, resilience and readiness as well as the possible legal impact and consequences of a cybersecurity-related incident. One-liners like “It is not about ‘if’ but ‘when’ a cybersecurity incident will happen in your organization,” or “Prepare for the worst, hope for the best,” are frequently used as eloquent calls to action, but what does that mean in practice for company lawyers? The purpose of this blog post is to provide company lawyers with some insights on current cybersecurity matters and to provide a basis for informed discussions about cybersecurity with key stakeholders within their organization, allowing them to ask the right questions to IT Security, to get relevant information from the key business functions and to inform the C-suite and the Board appropriately.

As the telework during the COVID-19 pandemic does not perfectly fit with the existing legal systems of occasional or structural telework, employers and employees were confronted during the last year with the absence of a clear legal framework. The new Collective Bargaining Agreement no. 149 of 26 January provides a framework for employers and their employees to make proper arrangements on several aspects of telework.

The Act of 20 December 2020 providing for various temporary and structural measures in the framework of the fight against the spread of Covid-19 (the “Act”) recently amended the statutory provisions on the holding of general meetings remotely using an electronic means of communication, in particular Articles 5:89 (SRL/BV) and 7:137 (SA/NV) of the Code of Companies and Associations (the “CCA”).