Track Record

Het Financieele Dagblad published an analysis of the intervention by Minister Karremans and the Enterprise Chamber in the Nexperia matter. In the article, Onno discusses, among other things, how an initially governance- and corporate-law issue could, due to its societal dimension, escalate into a geopolitical conflict between the Netherlands and China.

Marleen and Willem represented a director who was held personally liable by the landlord of the BV she managed. The BV intended to operate a lunchroom, but when it became clear that the zoning plan was insufficient and no operating licence would be granted, the BV terminated the lease agreement. The landlord claimed that the BV’s directors were liable for the damages suffered (missed rental payments). The court dismissed all claims and ordered the landlord to pay the legal costs.

Het Financieele Dagblad published a second analysis on the intervention by Minister Karremans and the Enterprise Chamber in the Nexperia matter. The article notes, among other things, how exceptional it was that the Enterprise Chamber reached a decision without hearing the other party: “That is seldom, if ever, seen and has led to significant debate among legal scholars. ‘Such a decision conflicts with the fundamental right to be heard,’ wrote corporate law attorney Onno Hennis of AMS Advocaten in a blog. The ruling shows that, among other factors, the urgency of the matter prompted the court to follow this exceptional procedure.”

Onno and Xagan successfully represented a company in an inquiry procedure following the sale of the business to a listed US company. The Enterprise Chamber dismissed the minority shareholder’s request for an inquiry.

Kelly, Marleen and Lennard concluded a settlement agreement for a foreign client in a long-running dispute about the enforcement of a foreign arbitral award. The settlement agreement will be notarised so it can be enforced without court intervention. Significant sanctions, including penalties, apply in case of non-compliance.

On appeal, the mentorship over AMS’s client was lifted because the Court of Appeal held that the measure was no longer necessary: the person concerned functioned stably, received appropriate care and had a sufficiently supportive network, so that his non-pecuniary interests could be adequately safeguarded without mentorship.

Kelly and Lennard concluded a settlement agreement on behalf of a software company with its client following an earlier judgment. Under that agreement, the client is ordered to perform the contract after all, subject to a penalty payment.

Lennard successfully represented a director and several companies that were being held liable for full legal costs of €400,000 incurred in earlier proceedings. The court ruled in favour of Lennard’s clients, finding that they had not abused process or acted unlawfully through their litigation conduct. The claimant was ordered to pay AMS’s client €13,853.00 in legal costs.

Following a land consolidation, certain easements had lapsed. Together with Denise, Marco successfully represented parties opposing the lapse of these easements. The district court held that the easements had been re-established through acquisitive prescription, because the claimants had been possessors in good faith for at least ten years. The Court of Appeal reached the same conclusion.

Sander, Kelly and Lennard assisted a Danish/American client at a WHOA hearing. The client had a claim against a Dutch debtor who tried to prevent and/or delay attachments by obtaining a cooling-off period. Sander, Lennard and Kelly managed to prevent this. The client was then better able to collect the remainder of its claims.