Introduction
This overview accompanies the main article on inquiry proceedings and contains all 614 analysed decisions, ordered by legal question.
Standing of the applicant
Indirect shareholders and economic entitlement
Felman / Archirodon (2025), Where genuine intermediate companies with substance are involved, equating indirect shareholders with providers of risk-bearing capital does not arise. Gerrard et al. / United Group (2025), Clarifies the limits of economic equal treatment under Section 2:346 DCC for indirect shareholders in international group structures; requires that the intermediate entities have no genuine significance. Europa Leasing / Van der Made (2018), The economic-entitlement doctrine for indirect shareholders through foreign intermediaries; confirmed on cassation (HR 2019:146). FEIST N.V. (Soops Investment) (2016), Economic entitlement through an intermediate entity that participates solely in the target company suffices for standing.
[A] / Ellips Systemen (2023), Slotervaartziekenhuis / Meromi / Jeemer (2013), H.C. Heuvelman Holding / Unifleet Holding (2012), Greater Europe Deep Value Fund / Amtel N.V. (2011).
Nortra / Simetra (2024).
Capital requirement and threshold requirements
Hillfresh Holding (Lifespan) (2019), Scope of the capital requirement of Section 2:346 DCC and equal treatment of providers of risk-bearing capital where the claims to shares are disputed. Cooperatieve Handelsvereniging Salo (2019), Standing threshold for cooperatives: the reference date is the moment of the decision (the Emba rule); a power of attorney granted afterwards does not turn someone into an applicant. Inter-Burgo Netherlands (2017), Strict enforcement of the time limit in Section 2:355(2) DCC: monitored of the court's own motion; a lawyer's default is at the applicant's risk.
Depositary-receipt holders and usufruct
[B] Holding (Europe Steel Center) (2021), Standing requirements in the case of usufruct of depositary receipts, acceptance under benefit of inventory, and the end of an executorship (JOR 2022/118, annotated by Perrick). Steenfabriek De Rijswaard (2022), Duty to inform and right of involvement of depositary-receipt holders in a family-business certification structure under Section 2:8 DCC (the Zwagerman line).
Former shareholder and continuing effect
[A]/[B] (bulb-growing business), extension/lifting of measures (2020), A former shareholder, by virtue of the continuing effect of Section 2:8 DCC, retains the right to have measures maintained; a party initially entitled remains entitled to request their extension. Aandelenbeheer bloembollenbedrijf (2019), Landmark decision on the legal nature of the transfer of shares by way of administration as a sui generis legal construct (JOR 2019/187).
Self-inquiry and foundations
Reinier Haga Groep (2022), Standing for a self-inquiry by a foundation without its own enterprise, based on interconnection (building on the SRK decision). Raeger Stichting (2024), Clarifies the standing requirement for foundations/legal persons as applicants where the petition is signed by a suspended director; nuances L2Fiber. GMR / SCBOLL (education foundation) (2021), Scope of the right of inquiry for education foundations; the Wms excludes the WOR; Section 2:344(b) DCC does not apply; extension by agreement is not possible (mandatory law).
Landgoed Den Alerdinck II (2020), [A] / [G] et al. (family fishing business) (2017).
Neva Invest (2025).
Interested party in the second phase
Fortis / Ageas (2011), Admission of aggrieved investors/claim foundations as interested parties in the second phase; a more limited position as regards access to confidential annexes. Laurus (VEB) (2003), The class of those entitled in the second phase is exhaustive; a request for declaratory effect offers no remedy for a party who does not meet Sections 2:346/347 DCC.
Listed companies
Signa Sports United (delisting) (2023), An immediate measure without an oral hearing where the consequences are irreversible (NYSE delisting); use of the right of inquiry at listed companies. LVMH / Gucci (2001), Limits on protective measures at a listed company with an open structure; the Section 2:8 DCC test for share issues aimed at fending off control.
Semi-public sector
DeSeizoenen (care institution) (2018), Inquiry petition by client councils of care institutions; property structures at institutions subject to a profit-distribution ban; the draining away of care funds.
Kanteel Beheer / Stichting Kanteel (2025), Clientenraad Vondelstede / Stichting Amsta (2021).
National security and state intervention
Nexperia / Yuching Holding (ex parte) (2025), Ex parte measures in a national-security context; suspension of a director, administration of shares, closed doors. Nexperia (EZ governance) (2026), The first inquiry case involving a contractual power derived from a covenant with the State (investment screening/national security); the central works council and employees have standing.
Deadlock and stalemate
P@ Beheer / PSB Steigers et al. (2024), IDM Group / Macon Group (2024), BigGym Holding (2023), [A Holding] / Quickmaster Autoservice (2023), [X] BV (family sand- and gravel-extraction business) (2023), PGH Autogroep (2020), Kaart In Actie / ICC (2018), Casa della Gioia (restaurant Dolce Vita) (2018), Byblos et al. / Raboni / Casa della Gioia (2017), ECC-Bimas (bicycle joint venture) (2017), Huisartsenpraktijk De la Rey (2017), [A] / Totalplast (2017), Seahorse Diving (2016), Strara Vastgoed / SR Horeca (2016), DR Groep et al. / XRC Connect (2016), Delco Participation (2016), DCS-Holding / Ortus Group (2016), NOVO Exploitatie / Roja Pe (2016), Lightco / Suncycle Holding (2015), Leanpro / Proov Holding (2015), [X] / Jimm Holding (childcare centres) (2013), Redelaar / Sovereign Trust (Netherlands) (2013), InterXion Holding N.V. (2002).
BVG et al. / E-Unit Nederland (2024), Mezutec Groep (2023), Fiscal Rep (2021), VDL Huizen Holding (2018), Oknetal / O&T Kindercentra (2018), Bovist / Hoeve Holland (2018), ProSolar Installatietechniek (2017), Asset manager (50/50 director conflict) (2016).
Conflict of interest
Versatel Telecom (2005), Limits of the group-company exception in the corporate governance code in relation to minority shareholders.
Mosadex / Apotheek Schiemond (2020), [A] / Sturio (2018), Monitus Holding / TMI-concern (2018), Blue Beheer (Escorpio) (2016), Diemsche Beuck / Loda Holding (2016), [A] / Nieuwendijk Monumenten (2015), Kygi / Pertuno (Instore Broadcast) (2015), Verzoekster / ALSA B.V. (2015), BENU Nederland / Holding Erstad Den Heijhof (2013).
Eetcafe De Stip (2021), Diverto Technologies / Hudson Bay (2021), IBB Kondor / De Leege Landen II (2017), [A] / Fabius B.V. (2014), Heirs [G] / 't Pierement Antiek en Beheer (2014), Coresta Marketservices (2014), V&M Management Consulting / Visser Duiven (2013).
Provision of information
VEB et al. / Landis Group N.V. (2003), A landmark on shareholders' entitlement to information at a listed company; an excessive acquisition policy and deficient books and records as a basis for well-founded reasons.
Leeuwarden Recycling (2024), Hollandbroom (2021), Spinnerij Oosterveld (2020), Halve Boog Beheer / Readen Retail (Neckermann) (2017), [A] / Waitingroom Media (WAChT! magazine) (2016), Pierson & Pierson (2012), Golfbaan Spaarnwoude / GMG Spaarnwoude (2011).
Nilli Secundus / Zoncol Solargroup (2022), [A] / DMBH Vastgoed Beheer (2018), [A] et al. / Energy Engineering Solutions (EES) International (2016), [A] / Hydrodent Oral Innovation (2014).
Withdrawals and current-account balances
[A] / Magic Coffee International (2022), Pervasco Groep (Kors B.V.) (2017).
Vrijburgh Holding / Cashan-groep (2023).
Enterprise Chamber appointees
Netvalue et al. / Hepta G (2018), Standing of a shareholder to request the discharge of an Enterprise Chamber director even after the second-phase request has already been dealt with.
Mezutec et al. (2024).
Dividend policy
Eisenhower / Body Engineers (2017), Koss et al. / [AA] (Van der Valk Groep) (2016).
Investigation budget
Geesink Norba Holding (2024).
Bankruptcy and trustees
[A] / Flextra et al. (2016).
Trustees [A] / Sypesteyn Holding (Dubai structure) (2019).
Mixed standing issues
[A]/[B] (bulb-growing business) (2020), Framework for adjusting second-phase measures: amendment is possible for as long as the measures are in force, and immediate measures "at any stage". QBB et al. / Marqt Holding (2019), Immediate measures that in effect deny force to an enforceable judgment in preliminary relief proceedings: room only in exceptional and weighty circumstances. Corus Nederland (2003), The relationship between group interest and company interest at companies subject to the structure regime; the supervisory board's own responsibility.
Vrouw Beheer / Man Beheer / Club M (2025), OOPDP / 2-S (4fluids) (2025), [A] / Intrimentum (2024), Parach / Aktie Notarissen (2023), [A] / Resim Vastgoed (2023), Family painting/renovation business (2021), Median Holding / GCRI et al. (2021), Vieux Manioc / DADTCO Philafrica (2020), Kinderopvang Wageningen (2019), Trifier Group of Companies (2018), Museum Hotel (2018), Villatent (2017), Kinderdagverblijf Het Zaans Stationnetje (2016), Meijbon Vastgoed Holding (2016), Bare owners / Beheersmaatschappij De Hoof Someren (2016), Old Brook Corner Holding / Penta Properties (2015), Stichting WiMa / Ambient B.V. (2015), Fondel Development / Inashco (2015), De IJsvogel / Agri Holding (Welkoop/Boerenbond) (2013), ING Bank / Nijl Aircraft Docking (2012).
Applicant / Phoen'x et al. (2024), Barcelona Investments et al. / [A] Group (2023), Target Fixings B.V. (2023), [A] / SMC Industrial (2021), Family shipping business (Holwerda) (2021), Holding Zeeuwse Visveilingen (2021), BTC Delft Holding (2021), Nearshoring / Twycis (2020), ITHEC ICT B.V. (2020), EmVeDee / MD-Square (2019), WiSH IP (2018), Knarf Beheer / Deventerweg en Harderwijk OZ (2018), Acrobat / Monitor Management en SmartVital (2018), Family [I] property (2017), STAK CLF / CL International (2017), Sveki / DGT (Toorank) (2015), OCAT / ABP Dynamics (2015), [A] en Havi / IE Funds II (2015), Loon- en Grondverzetbedrijf De Gier (2012).
Supreme Court
- ECLI:NL:HR:2023:1824 (2023, dismissed)
The Enterprise Chamber's starting point that, in buy-out proceedings following a public bid, the reference date equals the date on which payment under the bid is made available (provided the 95% threshold has then been reached) is not contrary to Article 1 First P - Funda, ECLI:NL:HR:2023:1283 (2023, dismissed)
The conduct of another legal person organisationally connected with the legal person, for example an indirect shareholder, may in some circumstances fall within the scope of the policy and conduct of affairs of that first-mentioned legal per - ECLI:NL:HR:2020:479 (2020, dismissed), Advocate General's opinion
For group inquiries the same test applies as formulated in HR 3 April 2020, ECLI:NL:HR:2020:478; in assessing these questions it is not necessary to answer questions that are important for the uniformity or development of the la - SNS Reaal, ECLI:NL:HR:2020:478 (2020, dismissed), Advocate General's opinion
A group inquiry requires that the companies are connected in a group and that the parent company has, in respect of the subjects underlying the inquiry petition, co- - ECLI:NL:HR:2019:146 (2019, dismissed), Advocate General's opinion
For standing to bring an inquiry petition under Section 2:346(1) DCC, the provision of risk-bearing capital is required; having an economic interest cannot be equated with the interest of a shareholder. - ECLI:NL:HR:2013:BY7833 (2013, dismissed), Advocate General's opinion
The provider of risk-bearing capital who has an economic interest of its own in the company to which the inquiry petition relates, which interest can to that extent be equated with the interest of a shareholder or depositary-receipt hol - ECLI:NL:HR:2010:BM6077 (2010, dismissed), Advocate General's opinion
Holders of depositary receipts forming part of an undivided estate must be treated as depositary-receipt holders within the meaning of Section 2:346, opening words and (b), DCC, and are jointly entitled to bring an inquiry petition. A final deci - ECLI:NL:HR:2005:AT0144 (2005, quashed), Advocate General's opinion
A bankrupt parent company is not entitled, without the trustee's cooperation, to bring an inquiry petition concerning its (non-bankrupt) subsidiary, because this is an act of administration relating to an asset of the estat - Landis, ECLI:NL:HR:2005:AR8899 (2005, dismissed), Advocate General's opinion
Shareholders of a parent company are in some circumstances entitled to bring an inquiry petition concerning wholly-owned subsidiaries where there is an economic and organisational unit under common management in whi - ECLI:NL:HR:2002:AD8832 (2002, dismissed), Advocate General's opinion
The Advocate General's power to seek an inquiry on grounds of the public interest is not limited by the fact that an investigation has already been ordered at another party's request. The assessment whether reasons of public interest justif - ECLI:NL:HR:2002:AD8831 (2002, quashed), Advocate General's opinion
A company is not entitled to request an inquiry into itself. The list of those entitled set out in Section 2:346 DCC is exhaustive and does not include the legal person that would be the subject of the investigation.
Supreme Court
- ECLI:NL:HR:2022:1580 (2022, dismissed)
An inquiry petition is not made on reasonable grounds within the meaning of Section 2:350(2) DCC where, in relation to the legal person, bringing it amounts to an abuse of procedural law, restraint being appropriate in view of the right of acce - ASMI, ECLI:NL:HR:2010:BM0976 (2010, quashed), Advocate General's opinion
Responsibility for the strategy to be pursued lies with the management board under the supervisory board's oversight; the board is not obliged to consult shareholders in advance about acts it is empowered to perform. The supervisory board is under no obligation to medi - KPNQwest, ECLI:NL:HR:2009:BD5516 (2009, dismissed), Advocate General's opinion
The purposes of the right of inquiry include not only reorganisation and the restoration of sound relations but also disclosure and establishing where responsibility lies for any mismanagement that may emerge. An inquiry may also be ord - ECLI:NL:HR:2005:AU2465 (2005, dismissed), Advocate General's opinion
The right of inquiry may also be applied to disputes of a proprietary nature, provided the conflict also affects the company's position and the functioning of its bodies and an inquiry can contribute to disclosure as a
Supreme Court
- ECLI:NL:HR:2023:1719 (2023, dismissed)
- ECLI:NL:HR:2020:2000 (2020, dismissed)
No express statutory basis is required for an order under Section 2:349a(2) DCC directing a director/shareholder to produce a 'witness statement' in foreign proceedings. - DSM, ECLI:NL:HR:2007:BB3523 (2007, quashed), Advocate General's opinion
Section 2:92(1) DCC does not preclude an arrangement granting registered shareholders a financial payment, provided there is no breach of the equal-treatment principle under Section 2:92(2). For immediate measures under Section 2: - Versatel / Tele2, ECLI:NL:HR:2007:BA4887 (2007, dismissed), Advocate General's opinion
In imposing immediate measures under Section 2:349a DCC the Enterprise Chamber may appoint supervisory directors and prohibit the company from departing from the corporate governance code where the interests of minority shareholders are insufficiently safeguar - Versatel / Centaurus, ECLI:NL:HR:2007:BA4888 (2007, dismissed), Advocate General's opinion
In imposing immediate measures under Section 2:349a DCC the Enterprise Chamber may temporarily depart from mandatory-law provisions, provided the measure is by its nature provisional, necessary for the state of the legal person, and a - Versatel, ECLI:NL:HR:2007:BA4117 (2007, dismissed), Advocate General's opinion
A construction whereby, after a public bid, minority shareholders are brought below the 5% threshold through a legal merger so that they can subsequently be bought out is not by definition contrary to the law or to Article 1 First Protoco - ABN AMRO, ECLI:NL:HR:2007:BA7971 (2007, quashed), Advocate General's opinion
In the absence of any statutory or articles-based rule, there is no right of approval of the general meeting or duty of the board to consult based solely on rules of unwritten law (Sections 2:8-9 DCC), in view of the legal certainty required in commercial dealin - ABN AMRO, ECLI:NL:HR:2007:BA7970 (2007, quashed), Advocate General's opinion
In the absence of any statutory or articles-based rule, there is no right of approval of the general meeting or duty of the board to consult based solely on rules of unwritten law (Sections 2:8-9 DCC), this in connection with the requirements of commercial dealings for legal cer - ABN AMRO, ECLI:NL:HR:2007:BA7972 (2007, quashed), Advocate General's opinion
In the absence of any statutory or articles-based rule, there is no right of approval of the general meeting of shareholders or duty of the board to consult based solely on rules of unwritten law (Sections 2:8-9 DCC), also in view of th - RNA, ECLI:NL:HR:2003:AF2161 (2003, partly quashed), Advocate General's opinion
Protective measures against hostile takeovers may be justified to create a status quo, but may not be used to sideline a major shareholder permanently without further consultation and without giving it the opportunit - ECLI:NL:HR:2002:AE8338 (2002, partly quashed), Advocate General's opinion
Where mismanagement has been established the Enterprise Chamber may impose far-reaching measures, but it cannot confer on a supervisory director at a company not subject to the structure regime powers under Part 6, Title 5 of Book 2 DCC. The Enterprise Cha - ECLI:NL:HR:2001:AD5138 (2001, dismissed), Advocate General's opinion
The Enterprise Chamber is free to impose such provisional measures as it considers necessary in view of the state of the legal person, even where this temporarily encroaches on the legal relationships prevailing withi
Supreme Court
- ECLI:NL:HR:2020:600 (2020, dismissed), Advocate General's opinion
The legal person that is the subject of an inquiry may in some circumstances refuse access to confidential information exchanged with a lawyer or notary, even where it is contained in minutes, board resolutions or correspondence with third parties, whe - ECLI:NL:HR:2019:316 (2019, dismissed), Advocate General's opinion
The investigation to be ordered by the court in inquiry proceedings may also cover objections other than those on which the finding rests that there are sufficient well-founded reasons to doubt sound policy, provided those other objections are sufficiently connec - LCI Technology Group, ECLI:NL:HR:2010:BM6078 (2010, dismissed), Advocate General's opinion
The Enterprise Chamber has discretionary powers to ask parties to produce documents, to hear the investigator at the hearing, or to reopen the investigation. The law provides no basis for an obligation to make use of these power - ECLI:NL:HR:2007:AZ8210 (2007, dismissed), Advocate General's opinion
A reliance on Section 2:349(1) DCC (prior written notice of objections) is available only to the legal person concerned itself. The Enterprise Chamber has a large measure of freedom in determining the scope and period of an investigation to be ord - ECLI:NL:HR:2005:AT2829 (2005, dismissed), Advocate General's opinion
An investigation ordered by the Enterprise Chamber does not extend to the policy of foreign companies, but the investigator may gather data on foreign companies that maintain relations with the Dutch compan
Supreme Court
- ECLI:NL:HR:2026:403 (2026, dismissed)
The Enterprise Chamber may, in the absence of a legally respectable interest in the request, find grounds to refrain from finding that the report discloses mismanagement, even where measures taken in the meantime post-date the fir - De Rijswaard, ECLI:NL:HR:2025:112 (2025, quashed), Advocate General's opinion
In its ruling the Enterprise Chamber responded insufficiently to the applicants' argument that governance falls short because, owing to the way the corporate structure is staffed (the dual roles), there are insufficient checks & - ECLI:NL:HR:2023:199 (2023, quashed), Advocate General's opinion
The interest of the legal person in the right of inquiry must also take account of the interests of minority shareholders, particularly where the dilution of their interest is at issue. The legal person has an independent interest in compliance with procedu - VIBA, ECLI:NL:HR:2003:AF1797 (2003, partly quashed), Advocate General's opinion
A one-off failure to inform shareholders which merely results in minority shareholders being left with an incorrect impression of conflicting interests does not constitute mismanagement. By contrast, a years-long - HBG, ECLI:NL:HR:2003:AF1486 (2003, quashed), Advocate General's opinion
The principles of proper corporate governance do not entail that the board is obliged to consult the general meeting of shareholders in advance when rejecting a private bid for a substantial part of the activities or when
Jurisdiction of the Enterprise Chamber
Choice of forum and statutory jurisdiction
Europa Leasing / Van der Made (2018), Statutory inquiry jurisdiction cannot be removed by contract through a choice-of-forum clause in an indemnity agreement. Prien Holding / Gravier (2020), Jurisdiction of the Enterprise Chamber versus the enforcement court in determining forfeited penalty payments in an international context (Article 55 Brussels I Regulation).
Signa Sports United (2024), FM1 Invest Germany (2024).
Foundations and semi-public legal persons
Reinier Haga Groep (2022), A foundation that maintains an enterprise for which a works council has been established falls within the jurisdiction of the Enterprise Chamber (Section 2:344(b) DCC).
National security
Nexperia / Yuching Holding (ex parte) (2025), A private limited company under Dutch law; no doubt as to the jurisdiction of the Enterprise Chamber.
Listed companies
Signa Sports United (delisting) (2023), A Dutch public limited company established in Amsterdam; the Enterprise Chamber's jurisdiction is beyond doubt, even with a NYSE listing.
Appointment of officers
COR Eneco / Eneco Groep N.V. (2018).
Well-founded reasons to doubt sound policy
Deadlock and stalemate
[shareholder 1] / [company 1] (construction business) (2025), Socius Wonen (2020), Buro ZP (2020), Opwerk / Trinity Investment Group (2018), [applicant] / [respondent 1] (Damhotel group) (2014), Trimp & Van Tartwijk / Living City (2008).
Mocoffee Company (2018), Royaums (2016).
Conflict of interest
Versatel Telecom (2005), Appointing only directors of the acquiring group as supervisory directors gives rise to well-founded reasons to doubt sound policy.
Willibrordushof Projectontwikkeling (2022), MeduProf-S Holding (Adamas Vught) (2016), EMS et al. / Staphorst Ontwikkeling (2016), Fayrefield International (2015).
Proteqt (QGroup) (2024), NiNoJu / Ambiente Europe (2011).
Provision of information
VEB et al. / Landis Group N.V. (2003), Multiple grounds: the books and records did not meet statutory requirements, and there was inadequate provision of information to shareholders.
Care Group (Sursum Corda) (2017), Arc en Ciel Investments (ACI) (2014).
OGL Planontwikkeling (2018).
Governance shortcomings
Reinier Haga Groep (2022), The governance of two hospital foundations had become unworkable after the decision to demerge. HBG (Hollandsche Beton Groep) (2001), A detailed order for further investigation with specific questions; well-founded reasons had already been accepted earlier as regards the joint venture/cooperation with Ballast Nedam.
Miller / Image Building Holding (2024).
Listed companies
Signa Sports United (delisting) (2023), Provisional finding: well-founded reasons to doubt sound policy in the face of a threatened NYSE delisting. Highfields / Delta Lloyd (2016), The test for immediate measures ahead of an ordered investigation ("sufficiently weighty reasons"); restraint in interfering with the general meeting's powers. LVMH / Gucci (2001), Two grounds: the ESOP was at odds with the law and the articles, and the PPR transaction breached reasonableness and fairness.
National security
Nexperia Holding / Yuching Holding (2025), National-security interests and foreign takeovers; immediate measures adjusted once their factual basis falls away. Nexperia / Yuching Holding (ex parte) (2025), On a provisional assessment, well-founded reasons to doubt sound policy and conduct of affairs at a semiconductor company in Chinese hands.
Proportionality and discretionary dismissal
Sneakerfirma Amsterdam (2024), Even where well-founded reasons exist, the Enterprise Chamber may dismiss an inquiry petition if the investigation cannot be financed; the purposes of the right of inquiry are then not achieved. Broekman Group (2021), The Enterprise Chamber's discretionary power not to order an inquiry despite well-founded reasons, on the basis of a balancing of interests (proportionality). Phanos Reit (2014), Requirements for the letter of objections under Section 2:349(1) DCC; questions about a lack of information, without being framed as a complaint about policy, are not sufficient.
Beta Beheer / [A] (2019), [B] (family property assets) (2019), Sapinda Holding (2017), Green Equity Holding (2017), [A] et al. / [B] (recycling business) (2017), [A] / [B] et al. (eviction and property services) (2017), C.d.R. Beheer / BrH (2017), MKA-Chirurgen Noordrand Rotterdam (2017), Prien Holding (2015).
OOPDP Holding / 2-S B.V. (2025), TDX / dmarcian Europe (2020), Cooperatie RKEC Roermond (2019), Eolia / Avinco Holdings (2016).
Standing as a preliminary question
Cooperatieve Handelsvereniging Salo (2019), The Enterprise Chamber observes, by way of obiter, that had it found the applicant to have standing, it would as yet have seen insufficient well-founded reasons. FEIST N.V. (Soops Investment) (2016), Well-founded reasons: investment commitments far exceeding available capital, and inadequate provision of information to the RVO.
Appointment of officers
Ministerie van Voedingszaken (2022).
Immediate measures
Deadlock and stalemate
RCM Consultancy / Middle Europe Investments (2011).
Conflict of interest
Versatel Telecom (2005), Appointment of three independent supervisory directors, excluding their powers over transactions with the acquiring Tele2 group.
[A] et al. / [C] en SWB Shipping (2021).
Governance shortcomings
Reinier Haga Groep (2022), Suspension of the foundation as director of the subsidiary foundation; appointment of an independent director and supervisory board at the subsidiary. HBG (Hollandsche Beton Groep) (2001), The prohibition on implementing the joint venture with Ballast Nedam is upheld.
Listed companies and protective structures
Signa Sports United (delisting) (2023), An order to the board to take all measures to file a timely request to postpone the delisting, without an oral hearing. Highfields / Delta Lloyd (2016), Dismissal of the immediate measure: the requested prohibition on putting a rights issue to the vote at the general meeting; restraint in interfering with the general meeting's powers. ASMI (Hermes et al.) (2008), A cooling-off period with an order to consult instead of an immediate assessment of the protective measure (later partly quashed by the Supreme Court). Consolidated Finance / Heineken Holding (2001), Limits of the duty of care of a holding company's board towards minority shareholders in the case of a share-price discount. Westfield / RNA (2001), Scope of protective measures and the monitoring role of investigators in ensuring compliance with immediate measures.
National security
Nexperia Holding / Yuching Holding (2025), Partial lifting of immediate measures imposed earlier once their factual basis falls away; adjustment of the proportionality assessment. Nexperia / Yuching Holding (ex parte) (2025), Ex parte (by way of high exception, Section 2:349a(3) DCC): suspension of a director, transfer of shares by way of administration, closed doors.
Emergency financing and share issue
Delphi Bioscience (2014), Emergency financing: authorisation of the board to issue shares while entirely bypassing the general meeting. Slotervaartziekenhuis (Jeemer/Meromi) (2015), The test for a share issue as crisis intervention; assessment ex tunc (as at the time of the decision).
Suspension and replacement of a director
Bambalia et al. / ZED+ (2016), An LCIA arbitral award as evidence despite confidentiality; a serious lack of integrity on the part of a director calls for suspension. Kelly / Phoenicia Hotel (2013), Overriding a unanimity requirement: urgent circumstances may justify it, but notice to the (dissenting) shareholders is required.
Departure from mandatory law
Shell / Cicerone Holding (2022), Departure from mandatory law (Section 2:196(1) DCC) by way of an immediate measure; a Wwft blockage as a ground; an EU-sanctions context. FNV (amendment of the articles) (2025), Immediate measure: having a trade union's articles amended by Enterprise Chamber appointees, even in departure from mandatory law (Section 2:42 DCC); review against Article 11 ECHR and ILO conventions. Shell / Cicerone (Todwick) (2023), Transfer of shares by private deed in departure from Section 2:196 DCC; dealing with obstruction through a Wwft-based refusal.
Group interest and company interest
Corus Nederland (2003), The subsidiary's supervisory board did not act unreasonably in refusing approval for the sale of the aluminium activities; its own responsibility. QBB et al. / Marqt Holding (2019), Immediate measures that in effect deny force to an enforceable judgment in preliminary relief proceedings: room only in exceptional and weighty circumstances.
Disclosure ban and publication ban
Nexperia / Yuching Holding (partial lifting of the ban) (2025), Disclosure ban, state intervention, diplomatic consultation; partial lifting in so far as the disclosures relate to a pending legislative procedure.
Framework for reviewing measures in force
[A]/[B] (bulb-growing business) (2020), Suspension/dismissal of a director refused: the loss-making performance was sufficiently explained by external factors; framework for adjusting measures. [A]/[B] (bulb-growing business), extension/lifting of measures (2020), Lifting of the transfer of shares by way of administration now that all shares are held by one party; extension of the supervisory director's appointment.
Drytec / Tema Process (2023), Digital Control / ImmuHold / CBMR (2022), TDX / dmarcian Europe (2021), [A] (Gerikink) (2019), NB Construction (2016), Spala / Teka (2016), Fortis N.V. (ESG et al.) (2009).
Tolo Green / TRP PVE (2022), Tolo Green / TRP PVE (2021).
Appointment of officers
OOPDP / 2-S (appointment of a director, immediate measure) (2025), PrivaZorg (2019), Eneco (2018), ECC-Bimas / Bimas (2017), OKami / WiSH IP et al. (2017), BSGR Holdings / Cunico Resources (2016), [Applicant] / Nieuwendijk Monumenten (2014).
Enterprise Chamber appointees
Netvalue et al. / Hepta G (2018), Request for the discharge of an Enterprise Chamber director and the appointment/confirmation of a successor.
Deus ex Machina (D.E.M.) B.V. (2016), [B] BV (2015), Leaderland TTM (2014).
Termination of measures
I.H.P. Holding / I.H.P. Beheer (2022), [A], [B] en [C] / [D] et al. (2022), Inter-Burgo Netherlands (2017), Holland Venture / Decidewise (2014).
Hollandbroom B.V. (2021), [A] / DMBH Vastgoed Beheer (2020), Eneco (2020), Jalloh Diamond Holding / New Look Holding & Hair (2018), Depron (2015), AAA Auto Group N.V. (2014).
Investigation budget
[shareholder A] et al. / MVD Europe (2025), Advocate General / Centric (2023), Beheersmaatschappij Johema / [A] BV (2022).
Cost order
ZED+ B.V. (2019).
Bankruptcy and trustees
Arch Industries / Novero Holdings (2013).
Huisartsenpraktijk De la Rey (2018).
Supreme Court
- QWEST, ECLI:NL:HR:2009:BH6537 (2009, partly quashed), Advocate General's opinion
The Enterprise Chamber is entitled not to allow an ordered investigation to proceed where the financial means necessary for it do not become available and there is no prospect of this, and it may set a period within which secur - Landis, ECLI:NL:HR:2005:AU4621 (2005, quashed), Advocate General's opinion
The costs referred to in Section 2:350(3) DCC do not automatically rank as an estate debt in the bankruptcy of the legal person into which an investigation has been ordered; the Enterprise Chamber has no task in deciding on this. - ECLI:NL:HR:2005:AT6025 (2005, quashed), Advocate General's opinion
The costs of an inquiry investigation under Section 2:350(3) DCC are not an estate debt where the company is bankrupt. The trustee may decide for himself whether to use estate assets for these costs, and the Enterprise Chamber has no pow - ECLI:NL:HR:2002:AE7940 (2002, dismissed), Advocate General's opinion
Under Section 2:354 DCC the Enterprise Chamber may order that the costs of an inquiry be recovered from directors or supervisory directors where the report shows that they are responsible for improper policy, and it forms its own judgment
The investigation
Investigation budget
[A Holding] / Leeuwarden Recycling (2025), ImmuHold / CBMR (2022), ICTS International N.V. (2022), [A] / GloMar Holding (2021), MBH B.V. / Omines Services (2021), Winplex Pacific / Permanento Beheer (2020), SKU (2020), MKA-Chirurgen Noordrand Rotterdam (2018), DeSeizoenen (2018), Netvalue / Hepta G (2017), [A] et al. / [A]-[B] (2016), Kelly / Phoenicia Hotel (Holding) (2015), Initio Group / LdB Ogilvy & Mather (2010).
Hepta G (2017), [B] Holding / Dekker q.q. (continued) (2016), [B] Holding / Dekker q.q. (2015), Energie Concurrent (2015).
Confidentiality and access to the investigation report
BCCH (ML Investments) (2014), The company itself needs no authorisation for access to its own report; the trustee exercises that power in so far as it serves the statutory task. Tana Netting (2014), The test of Section 2:353(3) DCC: the report is confidential; authorisation requires a connection with the purpose of the right of inquiry. Fortis (State, access to annexes) (2013), The standard consideration on the confidentiality of the investigation report and the class of "interested parties" under Section 2:353 DCC. CAV Den Ham (2019), When authorisation under Section 2:353(3) DCC is required (including between "known" parties); when the required interest is absent.
Spala / Heritage B B.V. (Teka) (2021), Priogen / Lamaro / Enerfund (2020), [A]/[B] / [C]/[D] (Scan-groep) (2019), Bean Holding / VOC Detachering (2018), Kinta et al. / TICA (2015).
GVH Recycling (2024), Prien Holding / Gravier (2021).
Independence and impartiality of the investigator
Leaderland TTM (2015), Independence of the investigator: free in the conduct and organisation of the work; the supervisory judge cannot compel a deadline. Omroep Limburg (L1) (2022), The test for discharging an investigator: objectively justified doubt as to impartiality/independence is required. SNS Reaal (replacement of the investigator) (2018), Impartiality of investigators; the relationship between an expert investigation and an inquiry investigation.
Marrobel (2023), Estro Groep (Catalpa N.V.) (2022), Prien Holding / Gravier (2021), Xeikon (2017), Thrinon et al. / Lansinkveste et al. (2016), Van Waveren et al. / Jeemer & Meromi (2015), Leaderland TTM (2015).
Duty to cooperate and provide information to the investigator
Xeikon (2015), Scope of the duty to cooperate and privacy defences in providing information to the investigator; the company has no role in selecting from its own e-mails. VEB / SNS Reaal (supervisory judge) (2019), The duty to provide information under Section 2:351 DCC includes a duty to appear for examination; frameworks for appending records of interviews.
Recalcico / Xeikon N.V. (2015).
Supervisory judge (raadsheer-commissaris)
Recalcico / Xeikon (supervisory judge) (2016), Scope of the supervisory judge's power to give directions under Section 2:350(4) DCC; confined to the procedural side.
Lex specialis and concurrence
Laurus (examination of witnesses) (2004), A provisional examination of witnesses and an inquiry investigation do not go together; the inquiry regime is a lex specialis in relation to Section 186 DCCP.
OK-functionarissen (remuneration)
Omroep Limburg (L1) (remuneration) (2022), Increase of the investigation budget and fixing of the remuneration of the Enterprise Chamber director and Enterprise Chamber supervisory director.
MBH / Omines Services / NKH (2022).
Appointment of officers
Eneco / Greenchoice (2014).
Listed companies
Signa Sports United (delisting) (2023), The investigation has not yet been ordered; adjourned. ASMI (Hermes et al.) (2008), The inquiry petition adjourned pending consultation and a further hearing. LVMH / Gucci (2001), Investigation ordered into the ESOP and the PPR transaction over a limited period (early January to 27 May 1999).
Provision of information
VEB et al. / Landis Group N.V. (2003), Investigation ordered covering the period 11 March 1998 to 8 July 2002, also as regards three wholly-owned subsidiaries (economic/organisational unit).
Governance shortcomings
Reinier Haga Groep (2022), Investigation ordered covering the period 1 January 2020 to 16 November 2022; costs to be borne by the applicant. HBG (Hollandsche Beton Groep) (2001), Further and supplementary investigation with detailed instructions on six sub-questions.
National security
Nexperia / Yuching Holding (ex parte) (2025), Investigation requested; the appointment of an investigator adjourned until after the oral hearing.
Termination of the investigation
Truedata / Circom (2019), Halve Boog Beheer / Readen Retail et al. (2018), H. de Diemsche Beuck / Loda Holding (2017).
Cost order (investigation costs)
MBH / Omines Services (2021).
Mismanagement
Governance shortcomings and structural mismanagement
Centric Holding (2022), Petition by the Advocate General on grounds of the public interest; holding almost all the shares does not release one from obligations; a "genuine embodiment of countervailing powers" is crucial. Centric (sole director/majority shareholder) (2023), The norm: holding almost all the shares does not release one from obligations; a five-year transfer by way of administration as a reference point. Centric (forced sale) (2024), The first explicit review of a forced sale in an inquiry against Article 1 First Protocol ECHR; criteria for the deprivation of property in the inquiry context. Centric / Eukairos (2025), The distinction "owner versus shareholder" as a normative framework; complementary to Centric 2023. Sovereign Trust (Netherlands) (2015), Mismanagement through an "extremely cursory and superficial" arrangement of the control issue when setting up the joint venture; deficient governance as a source of mismanagement. HBG (Hollandsche Beton Groep) (2001), Request for a finding of mismanagement adjourned for want of sufficient facts for a responsible assessment. Meavita (care sector) (2016), The first finding of mismanagement at care-sector foundations on this scale; an individualised apportionment of costs across 19 persons; governance norms for the semi-public sector.
[D] BV (fourth extension) (2018), [D] BV (third extension) (2016).
Mismanagement by all shareholders jointly
Acrobat Management / Monitor Management (2022), Mismanagement through a "complete lack of trust and persistent rancour" on the part of all three shareholders jointly.
Absence of record-keeping and accountability
Lamb Shepherd / Casa della Gioia (2023), Mismanagement: no meetings, no record-keeping, no dividend policy, cash withdrawals without any accounting.
Leveraged buy-outs and financial mismanagement
Estro / Catalpa (LBO childcare) (2019), A trustee-initiated inquiry at a bankrupt enterprise of societal importance; provision of information to the employee-participation body in an LBO; debt push-down. Estro / Catalpa (LBO, second phase) (2023), A normative framework for directors' obligations in leveraged buy-outs (paras. 3.13.1-3.13.6); individual cost orders. Landis Group (VEB/curatoren) (2011), Trustees are entitled, after bankruptcy, to recover costs under Section 2:354 DCC; the amount is strictly limited to the maximum fixed earlier.
Listed companies
Versatel Telecom (2005), Limits of the group-company exception in the corporate governance code in relation to minority shareholders. SNS Reaal (first phase) (2022), The largest inquiry at a financial institution; the well-founded-reasons test at a nationalised listed company; detailed investigation questions serving as a template. Versatel / Tele2 (squeeze-out of the minority) (2006), The norm that a controlling shareholder may squeeze out the minority through a transparent step-by-step plan with adequate provision of information and a reasonable exit mechanism.
Deadlock and stalemate
Setay Polyethersnijderij (2023).
Termination of measures after mismanagement
Sunberry / Flevo Berry Holding et al. (2022), [G] / [D] (2018), Leaderland TTM (appointment of a liquidator) (2018).
Investigation budget and operative part
[A] et al. / [C] (in liquidation) (2019).
Appointment of officers
Johema / [company A] et al. (2025), JIW Beheer / GVH Recycling (2023).
Final measures
Dissolution and liquidation
Leaderland TTM (dissolution) (2017), Dissolution of all four Leaderland companies under Section 2:356 DCC following a finding of mismanagement.
Compulsory transfer and deprivation of property
Centric (forced sale) (2024), The first explicit review of a forced sale in an inquiry against Article 1 First Protocol ECHR. Centric / Eukairos (2025), The distinction "owner versus shareholder" as a normative framework for final measures.
Adjustment and extension of measures in force
[A]/[B] (bulb-growing business) (2020), Measures imposed earlier (dismissal, appointment of a supervisory director, transfer of shares by way of administration) are upheld unchanged. [A]/[B] (bulb-growing business), extension/lifting of measures (2020), Extension of the supervisory director's appointment (two years) and lifting of the administration; a successor appointed. (bulb-growing business, continued) (2023), Obligation to undo the effects of mismanagement (the Zwagerman norm); the Enterprise Chamber's power to depart from a judgment in preliminary relief proceedings.
Scherpenzeel Pensioen / Konigsberg (2013).
Governance shortcomings
HBG (Hollandsche Beton Groep) (2001), Final measures adjourned pending further investigation.
Semi-public sector
SKU / Radboud (bisschoppenconferentie) (2020), The bishops' conference as a body of the foundation; setting aside the power of appointment by way of an immediate measure.
Share issue and control
(second phase, share issue) (2021), The distinction between mismanagement and improper policy (Ogem, Steenfabriek, ICTS, SNS); the duty of care towards minority shareholders in a share issue. Intergamma (Van Neerbos Groep) (2017), Conflict of interest of supervisory directors in strategic transactions; a "too narrow conception" of the duty of care under Section 2:8 DCC.
Termination of final measures
Greenchoice / Energie Concurrent (2019).
Cost orders
Legal costs where the application is inadmissible
Felman / Archirodon (2025), The applicant ordered to pay the legal costs (EUR 4,469 per respondent/interested party). Gerrard et al. / United Group (2025), The applicants ordered jointly and severally to pay the legal costs. Cooperatieve Handelsvereniging Salo (2019), The 62 remaining applicants ordered to pay the legal costs. FEIST N.V. (Soops Investment) (2016), The company ordered to pay the legal costs; the investigation costs to be borne by the company, with the provision of security.
Cost order on an inquiry petition
Feyecon / Echo Pharmaceuticals (2018).
Recovery of costs after bankruptcy
Landis Group (VEB/curatoren) (2011), Trustees are entitled, after bankruptcy, to recover costs under Section 2:354 DCC; the amount is strictly limited to the maximum fixed earlier.
Remuneration and protection of Enterprise Chamber appointees
IHP Holding (2023), Section 2:357(6) DCC can also be invoked after the inquiry proceedings have ended to protect Enterprise Chamber appointees. Westcon / Royal Care Holding (2022), Fixing of the remuneration of the Enterprise Chamber director. Omroep Limburg (L1) (remuneration) (2022), Fixing of the remuneration of the Enterprise Chamber director and Enterprise Chamber supervisory director. Netvalue et al. / Hepta G (2018), Cost order against the shareholder after a dismissed request to discharge the Enterprise Chamber director.
Auragenix (2013).
Conflict of interest
Versatel Telecom (2005), The company ordered to pay the legal costs on the side of the applicants and the VEB; the remaining costs offset.
Mismanagement
Leaderland TTM (dissolution) (2017), Directors ordered to pay the legal costs following a finding of mismanagement. Estro / Catalpa (LBO, second phase) (2023), Individual cost orders in a case of leveraged-buy-out mismanagement.
National security
Nexperia Holding / Yuching Holding (2025), No cost order in this decision.
Confidentiality and access
Staat der Nederlanden / Fortis N.V. (access to annexes) (2013), No cost order; the request dismissed.
[A] / ICTS International (2024).
Provision of information
VEB et al. / Landis Group N.V. (2003), The company ordered to pay the legal costs and to bear the investigation costs.
Listed companies
LVMH / Gucci (2001), The company ordered to pay the legal costs; the investigation costs to be borne by the company. Highfields / Delta Lloyd (2016), Decision on costs adjourned. ASMI (Hermes et al.) (2008), Decision on costs adjourned.
Governance shortcomings
Reinier Haga Groep (2022), Legal costs offset. HBG (Hollandsche Beton Groep) (2001), All decisions on costs adjourned.
Cost compensation and withdrawal
Shell / Cicerone (Todwick) (2023), No order for legal costs. Omroep Limburg (L1) (2022), No order for legal costs where the request to discharge the investigator was dismissed. [A]/[B] (bulb-growing business) (2020), The applicant ordered to pay costs as the unsuccessful party. [A]/[B] (bulb-growing business), extension (2020), Legal costs offset; each party unsuccessful in part. Europa Leasing / Van der Made (2018), The inadmissible applicant ordered to pay the legal costs. Bambalia et al. / ZED+ (2016), The suspended director ordered to pay the legal costs. Delphi Bioscience (2014), Interested parties ordered jointly and severally to pay the costs on the side of the Support Fund. Kelly / Phoenicia Hotel (2013), Costs to be borne by the company as the unsuccessful party.
Uw Slager B.V. (2015).
Investigation budget
dmarcian Europe (2021).
Ergo Buildings (2024), RSW Property / Chevrayne Management (2020), DeSeizoenen (2018), New Company Investments / Enraf-Nonius (2018).
Withdrawal and settlement
Drytec / Tema Process (2025), Emin Holding / Akbulut Beheer et al. / Helal Food (2024), Via Nova Holding / TICA (2024), ForScience / SpecifAI Group (2024), Play Like A Champion / Socios (2024), Mezutec / [A] Beheer (2024), Domestico Zorg / Thijs Holding (2023), Betap Holding et al. (2023), Sogestran Shipping / De Poli Tankers Holding (2022), VTS Groep Nederland (2021), DanZep GP Interim (2021), Corium / Lederland (2021), Monitus Holding B.V. / [A] (2020), C&V Beheer / Tandartsenpraktijk Seghwaert (2019), [A] / Maja Investments et al. (2019), Waves Asset Management / Parhelion (2019), [A] / N&I Professional Services (2019), Zuyderstaete / Jalouvre Management (2019), Han Detacheringen / W&F Detacheringen (2018), [A] / Adcim Beheer (2017), Applicants (23 persons) / RTC N.V. / RTC Franchise (2016), SMS Co. Ltd. / Elpak B.V. (2015), Jepenpo / Huursnel (2014), Dekker (vereffenaar nalatenschap) / [B] Holding (2014), De Orthopedische Schoenmakerij (DOS) / Praamstra (2013).
Luxx Beauty / True Line Hair & Beauty (2021), Adservio / 365 Payroll et al. (2018), [A] / HnL Group (2018), [A] / Uw Slager (2015), [A] et al. / Makati (2015), Leanpro / Proov Holding et al. (2015).
Methodology: 614 Enterprise Chamber decisions on the right of inquiry and 74 Supreme Court judgments with 63 Advocate General's opinions, covering the period 2001-2026.
Supreme Court, Other judgments (Section 81 RO and procedural law)
33 judgments without substantive reasoning or of a procedural nature.
- ECLI:NL:HR:2025:1461 (2025, dismissed)
The Supreme Court dismisses the appeal in cassation under Section 81(1) RO without substantive reasoning. - ECLI:NL:HR:2025:1408 (2025, dismissed), Advocate General's opinion
The appeal in cassation is dismissed under Section 81(1) RO because the grounds cannot lead to the judgment being quashed and do not require answers to questions that are important for the uniformity or development of the law. - ECLI:NL:HR:2025:854 (2025, Section 81 RO), Advocate General's opinion
The grounds against the court's decision cannot lead to it being quashed and require no reasoning, because the assessment does not call for answers to questions that are important for the uniformity or development of the law. - ECLI:NL:HR:2024:1256 (2024, Section 81 RO), Advocate General's opinion
The Supreme Court disposes of the case under Section 81 RO, the grounds against the Enterprise Chamber's decision that there is mismanagement at two companies and that they must be dissolved by way of a final measure being unable to lead to qua - ECLI:NL:HR:2024:820 (2024, Section 81 RO), Advocate General's opinion
The grounds concerning the role of supervisory directors, the finding of mismanagement, the annulment of discharge resolutions, the order to pay investigation costs, the significance of the public interest and conflict of interest cannot lead to quashing and require no reasonin - ECLI:NL:HR:2024:817 (2024, Section 81 RO), Advocate General's opinion
Grounds in cassation concerning inquiry proceedings (the role of supervisory directors, the finding of mismanagement, the annulment of discharge resolutions and the order to pay investigation costs) cannot lead to quashing and are disposed of with Section 81(1) RO reasonin - ECLI:NL:HR:2024:631 (2024, Section 81 RO), Advocate General's opinion
The Supreme Court has assessed the grounds against the Enterprise Chamber and held that they cannot lead to quashing, because the assessment does not call for answers to questions that are important for the uniformity or developme - ECLI:NL:HR:2023:1514 (2023, quashed)
Under Section 25(1), opening words and (g), of the Works Councils Act (WOR) the works council has a right of advice in respect of any proposed decision to hire in workers on a group basis, even where this concerns a manner of group hiring-in customary for the enterpri - Conservatrix, ECLI:NL:HR:2023:839 (2023, dismissed), Advocate General's opinion
In determining additional compensation after a compulsory transfer of shares under Section 3:159ab (old) Wft, the Enterprise Chamber is under the same independent duty of investigation as in expropriation under the Expropriation Act; Section 6:1 - ECLI:NL:HR:2023:567 (2023, Section 81 RO), Advocate General's opinion
Cannot be ascertained from this Section 81 RO decision. - ECLI:NL:HR:2023:565 (2023, Section 81 RO), Advocate General's opinion
Section 81(1) RO: the grounds cannot lead to the court's decision being quashed, because an answer is not needed for the uniformity or development of the law. - ECLI:NL:HR:2023:490 (2023, Section 81 RO), Advocate General's opinion
In assessing grounds in cassation against a second-phase decision in which the Enterprise Chamber dismissed a request for a finding of mismanagement, it is not necessary to answer questions that are important for the uniformity or the - ECLI:NL:HR:2020:1745 (2020, dismissed)
In fixing the buy-out price under Section 2:201a(5) DCC the court may disregard the effects of acts of the buying-out shareholder that took place before the price reference date and that affected the value of the shares to the detri - ECLI:NL:HR:2020:1593 (2020, dismissed)
Even after the inquiry proceedings have ended, it may be examined in cassation whether a decision of the Enterprise Chamber given during the inquiry proceedings must be quashed, provided an appeal in cassation against that decision was brought in time and in the proper manne - ECLI:NL:HR:2020:1283 (2020, Section 81 RO)
The Supreme Court need not give reasons why grounds in cassation cannot lead to quashing, because there are no points of law important for the uniformity or development of the law. - ECLI:NL:HR:2020:588 (2020, Section 81 RO), Advocate General's opinion
In assessing whether a pledgee has, through its conduct, harmed the company's interest to such an extent that it cannot reasonably be tolerated that it continues to exercise the voting rights (Section 2:342 DCC), what matters is the conduct of the pledge - ECLI:NL:HR:2019:1279 (2019, partly quashed), Advocate General's opinion
The court must properly summon interested parties who have not appeared, including after any amendment or enlargement of the request. If this does not happen, there is a breach of the right to be heard. An obvious error within the meaning of Section 31 DCCP arises only where - ECLI:NL:HR:2011:BN8852 (2011, dismissed), Advocate General's opinion
The restricted assets within the meaning of Section 2:18(6) DCC consist in this case of the balance of all asset components at the moment the foundation is converted. The restriction does not attach to the individual assets and liabilities, but to the equit - KPNQwest V, ECLI:NL:HR:2010:BO3356 (2010, partly quashed), Advocate General's opinion
A request to institute an investigation under Section 2:345(1) DCC can no longer be withdrawn once it has been decided by an express operative order. In assessing a request for termination, principal significance attaches to the interests of the origin - QWEST, ECLI:NL:HR:2009:BI0216 (2009, dismissed), Advocate General's opinion
An appeal in cassation against a letter from the registrar of the Enterprise Chamber is inadmissible because it contains no decision that affects the parties' rights. - Spyker, ECLI:NL:HR:2009:BG8790 (2009, dismissed), Advocate General's opinion
The Enterprise Chamber is not obliged, at every departure from the rules (IAS and IFRS), to order amendment of the annual accounts where a reasonable interpretation and application of those rules mean that the accounts provide the required insight and a - Begemann, ECLI:NL:HR:2008:BC2725 (2008, Section 81 RO), Advocate General's opinion
In an inquiry into a company with a single controlling shareholder the board is under a special duty of care towards minority shareholders, requiring openness about the provision of information, strategy and any conflicting intere - ECLI:NL:HR:2007:BB4203 (2007, Section 81 RO), Advocate General's opinion
The Supreme Court applies Section 81 RO and dismisses the appeal in cassation without further reasoning because the grounds do not call for the answering of points of law in the interest of the uniformity or development of the law. - TCA, ECLI:NL:HR:2007:BA1082 (2007, Section 81 RO), Advocate General's opinion
Grounds that do not call for the answering of points of law in the interest of the uniformity or development of the law cannot lead to cassation (Section 81 RO). - ECLI:NL:HR:2007:AZ1647 (2007, partly quashed), Advocate General's opinion
For decisions falling under the primacy of politics (Section 46d, opening words and (b), WOR) a right of advice exists only for decisions that seek to, or are specifically aimed at, regulating personnel consequences. The mere fact that a reque - ECLI:NL:HR:2006:AX9708 (2006, Section 81 RO), Advocate General's opinion
The grounds put forward in the plea cannot lead to cassation in view of Section 81 RO, since they do not call for the answering of points of law in the interest of the uniformity or development of the law. - Unilever, ECLI:NL:HR:2006:AX6622 (2006, dismissed), Advocate General's opinion
There is no 'prejudice to rights' within the meaning of Section 2:99(5) DCC where preference shares are cancelled with repayment as already laid down in the articles before issue, so that the company is not obliged to make the cancellati - ECLI:NL:HR:2006:AX6615 (2006, Section 81 RO), Advocate General's opinion
The mere fact that the board has acted contrary to provisions of the articles or statute is not a sufficient ground to assume that there are well-founded reasons to doubt sound policy. The Enterprise Chamber has a broa - SOBI/KPN, ECLI:NL:HR:2006:AU7473 (2006, quashed), Advocate General's opinion
In dealing with annual-accounts proceedings the Enterprise Chamber may not of its own motion examine objections not raised by the claimant. Furthermore, the Dutch Accounting Standards (Richtlijnen voor de Jaarverslaggeving) are an important source of what, in soci - ECLI:NL:HR:2003:AF0644 (2003, Section 81 RO), Advocate General's opinion
The Supreme Court dismisses the appeal in cassation without substantive reasoning under Section 81 RO, since the grounds do not call for the answering of points of law in the interest of the uniformity or development of the law. - ECLI:NL:HR:2002:AE8320 (2002, dismissed), Advocate General's opinion
The refusal of the board of a company pension fund to act on advice given of its own motion by the members' council is a decision open to appeal within the meaning of Section 6c PSW. Where the appeal is well-founded the Enterprise Chamber may - ECLI:NL:HR:2002:AE4663 (2002, quashed), Advocate General's opinion
A pledgee of claims cannot be regarded as 'the creditor for whose claim liability still runs' within the meaning of Section 2:404(5) DCC and therefore has no right to object to the termination of the remaining li - ECLI:NL:HR:2002:AD9856 (2002, quashed), Advocate General's opinion
For Section 46d, opening words and (b), WOR (the primacy of politics) it suffices that tasks are laid down under public law, regardless of whether they come about through democratic bodies with legislative power or other democratically control