Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

National Report on the Netherlands

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Groups of Companies

Part of the book series: Ius Comparatum - Global Studies in Comparative Law ((GSCL,volume 43))

  • 459 Accesses

Abstract

This national report deals with the regulation of company groups in the Netherlands primarily from a company law perspective.

After providing a general introduction into Dutch company law and the regulation of company groups in the Netherlands, the chapter provides an introduction into the various definitions of company groups and subsidiaries. The point of departure is company law but definitions in other areas of the law are also briefly mentioned. Next to that, issues of group management as well as liability issues in company groups are discussed. The chapter furthermore touches upon the issue of minority shareholder protection as well as a number of other miscellaneous issues relevant in relation to company groups such as bankruptcy and private international law. The chapter concludes with a brief overview of the most important aspects of the regulation of company groups.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 189.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 249.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 249.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Art. 2:153/263 DCC.

  2. 2.

    Art. 2:158/268-6 DCC.

  3. 3.

    Stb. 2011, 275.

  4. 4.

    Art. 2:129a/239a DCC and art. 2:164a/274 a DCC.

  5. 5.

    Art. 2:164/274 DCC.

  6. 6.

    Art. 2:164a/274a DCC.

  7. 7.

    Directive 2013/34/EU of the European Parliament and the Council of 26 June 2013 on the annual financial statements, consolidated financial statements and related reports of certain types of undertakings, amending Directive 2006/43/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and repealing Council Directives 78/660/EEC and 83/349/EEC.

  8. 8.

    Bartman et al. (2016), p. 31.

  9. 9.

    Bier and Quist (2016), p. 207; Van Solinge and Nieuwe Weme (2009), nr. 816.

  10. 10.

    Van Solinge and Nieuwe Weme (2009), nr. 816.

  11. 11.

    Bier and Quist (2016), p. 207.

  12. 12.

    See Zaal (2014), p. 136.

  13. 13.

    See Zaal (2014), p. 136.

  14. 14.

    Translations of legal provisions in English in this chapter are (partly) based on the unofficial translation that can be found on the following website http://www.dutchcivillaw.com/civilcodebook022.htm.

  15. 15.

    Art. 2:24a-2 DCC.

  16. 16.

    Dorresteijn (2017b), art. 2:24a BW, aant. 7.

  17. 17.

    Dorresteijn (2017b), art. 2:24a BW, aant. 7.

  18. 18.

    Dorresteijn (2017b), art. 2:24a BW, aant. 7.

  19. 19.

    Dorresteijn (2017a), art. 2:24a BW, aant. 6.

  20. 20.

    Bier and Quist (2016), p. 207; Van Solinge and Nieuwe Weme (2009), nr. 816.

  21. 21.

    Dorresteijn (2017a), art. 2:24a BW, aant. 6 with reference to the parliamentary history Kamerstukken II, NvW 19813, nr. 9, p. 4.

  22. 22.

    See for this unofficial translation of these provisions the following website: http://www.dutchcivillaw.com/civilcodebook022.htm.

  23. 23.

    See for this unofficial translation of these provisions the following website: http://www.dutchcivillaw.com/civilcodebook022.htm which has also been used as source of inspiration for the remainder of this chapter.

  24. 24.

    See for the albeit unofficial translation of these provisions the following website: http://www.dutchcivillaw.com/civilcodebook022.htm.

  25. 25.

    Bier and Quist (2016), pp. 211–212.

  26. 26.

    Art. 2:152/262 DCC. See in this respect Bartman et al. (2016), p. 102.

  27. 27.

    Van Schilfgaarde et al. (2017), nr. 146.

  28. 28.

    Art. 2:153/263 DCC.

  29. 29.

    Art. 2:155/265 DCC.

  30. 30.

    See Van Schilfgaarde et al. (2017), nr. 146 and 147.

  31. 31.

    See Zaal (2014), p. 139.

  32. 32.

    See for an overview Zaal (2014), Chapter 4 on employee participation in company groups.

  33. 33.

    See in this respect Bartman et al. (2016), p. 32.

  34. 34.

    Joined Cases C-398/16 and C-399/16 ‘X BV and X NV v Staatssecretaris van Financiën, ECLI:EU:C:2018:110.

  35. 35.

    Art. 8b Corporation Tax Act.

  36. 36.

    Art. 14 to 14ba of the Corporation Tax Act.

  37. 37.

    See in this respect with examples which are also mentioned in this chapter Bartman et al. (2016), pp. 36–39 and pp. 50–55.

  38. 38.

    Art. 2:333a-2 DCC.

  39. 39.

    Article 2:359c and 359d DCC.

  40. 40.

    See for these and other examples Bartman et al. (2016), pp. 36–39.

  41. 41.

    See art. 33 Works Counsel Act (Wet op de ondernemingsraden).

  42. 42.

    Art. 2:406-1 DCC.

  43. 43.

    IJsselmuiden Th (2005), art. 2:406 BW, aant. 2.1.

  44. 44.

    Van Schilfgaarde et al. (2017), nr. 105.

  45. 45.

    Art. 2:414-2 DCC sub a, b and d.

  46. 46.

    Art. 2:414-2 DCC sub c.

  47. 47.

    Art. 2:391-5 DCC.

  48. 48.

    See for the Dutch Corporate Governance Code 2016http://www.mccg.nl/de-code.

  49. 49.

    See Dutch Corporate Governance Code 2016, best practice 1.4.2.

  50. 50.

    Supreme Court (Hoge Raad, hereinafter: HR) 21 January 1955, NJ 1959/43 (Forumbank).

  51. 51.

    Art. 2:239-4 DCC. See about instruction rights amongst others Dahmen (2014), p. 66.

  52. 52.

    See with regard to the autonomy of the board Verdam e.a. (2015).

  53. 53.

    Art. 2:129-4 DCC. See Huizink (2017a) art. 2:129 BW, aant. 11.10.

  54. 54.

    Van Schilfgaarde et al. (2017), nr. 62.

  55. 55.

    See Supreme Court (HR), 21 December 2001, ECLI:NL:HR:2001:AD4499, JOR 2002/38, m.nt. N.E.D. Faber en S.M. Bartman (Hurks).

  56. 56.

    Supreme Court (HR) 10 January 1990, ECLI:NL:HR:1990:AC1234, NJ 1990/466, m.nt. J.M.M. Maeijer (OGEM).

  57. 57.

    See later in a similar vein Supreme Court (HR), 21 December 2001, ECLI:NL:HR:2001:AD4499, JOR 2002/38, m.nt. N.E.D. Faber en S.M. Bartman (Hurks).

  58. 58.

    See amongst others Van Solinge and Nieuwe Weme (2009) nr. 828; Bartman et al. (2016), p. 79; Bartman (2016/77).

  59. 59.

    Bartman (2016/77).

  60. 60.

    See amongst others Van der Sangen (2009), pp. 147–148.

  61. 61.

    Van Solinge and Nieuwe Weme (2009), nr. 828.

  62. 62.

    Van Solinge and Nieuwe Weme (2009), nr. 828.

  63. 63.

    Best practice 1.2.2. See about the consequences of these corporate governance developments in relation to the management of company groups Bartman (2004).

  64. 64.

    Art. 2:129/239-5 DCC.

  65. 65.

    Huizink (2017b), art. 2:129 BW, aant. 11.7; Van Solinge and Nieuwe Weme (2009) nr. 827 and 829; Boschma (2015), p. 112. According to Bartman, Dorresteijn & Olaerts the company interest is to a large extent derived from the group interest as defined by the group policy; Bartman et al. (2016), pp. 22–25; See in this respect Bartman (2016/77). See also case law Enterprise Chamber, Court of Amsterdam (Ondernemingskamer hereinafter: OK) 9 July 2013, ECLI:NL:GHAMS:2013:2336, JAR 2013/223, m.nt. Zaal (Watts).

  66. 66.

    Enterprise Chamber, Court of Amsterdam (OK) 13 March 2003, ECLI:NL:GHAMS:2003:AF5761, JOR 2003/85.

  67. 67.

    See for a rather recent case concerning the autonomy of the board in case of a joint venture which has been broadly discussed in the literature Supreme Court (HR) 4 April 2014, ECLI:NL:HR:2014:799 JOR 2014/290 m.nt. De Haan (Cancun). See for literature amongst others Raaijmakers (2015-1), pp. 2–12; Verdam e.a. (2015).

  68. 68.

    Supreme Court (HR) 26 October 2001, ECLI:NL:HR:2001:AD4804, NJ 2002/94, m.nt. J.M.M. Maeijer, JOR 2002/2, m.nt. Bartman (Juno).

  69. 69.

    Supreme Court (HR) 29 June 2007, ECLI:NL:HR:2007:BA0033, NJ 2007/420 (Bruil Kombex); Supreme Court (HR) 21 March 2008, ECLI:NL:HR:2008:BC1849, NJ 2008/297 (Nieuw Steen Investments).

  70. 70.

    See for the right to give advice art. 25 Works Council Act (Wet op de ondernemingsraden).

  71. 71.

    See for an overview Bartman et al. (2016), p. 151 and further; Zaal (2014), p.163 and further.

  72. 72.

    Bartman et al. (2016), p. 241; Assink and Slagter (2013) § 115.3, p. 2254.

  73. 73.

    The basis for these consolidated accounts can be found at the EU level in directive 2013/34/EU of the European Parliament and the Council of 26 June 2013 on the annual financial statements, consolidated financial statements and related reports of certain types of undertakings, amending Directive 2006/43/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and repealing Council Directives 78/660/EEC and 83/349/EEC.

  74. 74.

    This means that it will not, amongst others, require an accountant or a management report and the annual account does not have to be published with the commercial registry along the lines provided for regular companies. See Van Schilfgaarde et al. (2017), nr. 106.

  75. 75.

    Article 2:403-1 sub f DCC.

  76. 76.

    Article 2:406-1 DCC.

  77. 77.

    Dorresteijn (2017a), art. 2:24a BW, aant. 6.

  78. 78.

    Kiersch (2017), art. 2:406 BW.

  79. 79.

    Bartman et al. (2016), p. 194.

  80. 80.

    Van Schilfgaarde et al. (2017), nr. 106.

  81. 81.

    It does not arise already on the basis of art. 2:403 DCC, a declaration is required and is regarded as a unilateral legal act which is not directed towards a specific party. Supreme Court (HR) 28 June 2002, ECLI:NL:HR:2002:AE4663, JOR 2002/136, m.nt. S.M. Bartman (Akzo Nobel/ING).

  82. 82.

    Supreme Court (HR) 11 April 2014, ECLI:NL:HR:2014:898, JOR 2014/198. See also Bier and Quist (2016), pp. 216–217.

  83. 83.

    Supreme Court (HR) 20 March 2015, ECLI:NL:HR:2015:661, JOR 2015/140, m.nt. M.W.J. Jitta (SNS). See also Bier and Quist (2016), pp. 216–217.

  84. 84.

    This is a translation of the courts ruling: “(…) van het identiteitsverschil tussen twee door dezelfde persoon beheerste rechtspersonen misbruik kan worden gemaakt, en op de eveneens juiste gedachte dat hetgeen met zodanig misbruik werd beoogd — naar ’s Hofs oordeel in dit geval: het ten nadele van de beslaglegger frustreren van een beslag — in rechte niet behoeft te worden gehonoreerd.” Supreme Court (HR) 9 June 1995, ECLI:NL:HR:1995:ZC1752, NJ 1996/213 (Citco).

  85. 85.

    See for a recent case in which the Supreme Court rejected this technique: HR 7 October 2016, ECLI:NL:HR:2016:2285, NJ 2017/124 m.nt. Van Schilfgaarde (Resort of the World); Supreme Court (HR) 13 October 2000, ECLI:NL:HR:2000:AA7480, NJ 2000/698 m.nt. Ma (Rainbow). See also Bartman et al. (2016), pp. 247–254.

  86. 86.

    Van Solinge and Nieuwe Weme (2009), nr. 835.

  87. 87.

    Assink and Slagter (2013), § 115.3, p. 2258.

  88. 88.

    See in this respect Assink and Slagter (2013), § 115.3, p. 2255.

  89. 89.

    Art. 6:162-2 DCC.

  90. 90.

    Assink and Slagter (2013), § 115.3, p. 2261.

  91. 91.

    See with regard to these issues Assink and Slagter (2013), § 115.3, p. 2263.

  92. 92.

    Bartman et al. (2016), p. 259.

  93. 93.

    Supreme Court (HR) 18 November 1994, ECLI:NL:HR:1994:ZC1544, NJ 1995/170 (NBM/Securicor). In this case a representative of the parent company raised the expectation that the parent company would pay for the debts of its subsidiary.

  94. 94.

    Supreme Court (HR) 12 June 1998, ECLI:NL:HR:1998:ZC2669, NJ 1998/727 (Coral/Stalt); Supreme Court (HR) 8 November 1991, ECLI:NL:HR:1991:ZC0401, NJ 1992/174 (Nimox).

  95. 95.

    See for various categories Assink and Slagter (2013), § 115.3, p. 2263.

  96. 96.

    Supreme Court (HR) 25 September 1981, ECLI:NL:HR:1981:AG4232, NJ 1982/443 (Osby).

  97. 97.

    Supreme Court (HR) 12 June 1998, ECLI:NL:HR:1998:ZC2669, NJ 1998/727 (Coral/Stalt). See Bartman et al. (2016), p. 262.

  98. 98.

    Supreme Court (HR) 6 October 1989, ECLI:NL:HR:1989:AB9521, NJ 1990/286, m.nt. J.M.M. Maeijer (Beklamel).

  99. 99.

    Supreme Court (HR) 21 December 2001, ECLI:NL:HR:2001:AD4499, NJ 2005/96, m.nt. J.M.M. Maeijer (Hurks II).

  100. 100.

    Supreme Court (HR) 21 December 2001, ECLI:NL:HR:2001:AD4499, NJ 2005/96, m.nt. J.M.M. Maeijer (Hurks II).

  101. 101.

    Supreme Court (HR) 11 September 2009, ECLI:NL:HR:2009:BH4033, NJ 2009/565 (Comsys).

  102. 102.

    Van Schilfgaarde et al. (2017), nr. 49.

  103. 103.

    Art. 2:11 DCC.

  104. 104.

    Dutch law does not distinguish between de facto and shadow directorship. These terms are used here interchangeably.

  105. 105.

    Dortmond (2013), nr. 399.2.

  106. 106.

    MvA 16631, pp. 23–24. See also Bartman et al. (2016), p. 273.

  107. 107.

    See for an overview Huizink (2017c), art. 2:138 BW, aant. 28.3.

  108. 108.

    Bartman et al. (2016), p. 274; Huizink (2017d), art. 2:138 BW, aant. 30.

  109. 109.

    Bartman et al. (2016), p. 275.

  110. 110.

    See conclusion of A-G Timmerman in Supreme Court (HR) 17 November 2006, ECLI:NL:PHR:2006:AY9710, ECLI:NL:HR:2006:AY9710, JOR 2007/7 (Bonbosch). See with regard to a decision of a lower court ruling that the setting aside of the formal directors is not a requirement. Rechtbank Noord-Holland 25 March 2015, ECLI:NL:RBNHO:2015:2480, JOR 2015/136. According to the court, it is sufficient if the de facto director has decided on certain specific policy issues.

  111. 111.

    Huizink (2017d), art. 2:138 BW, aant. 28.3.2.

  112. 112.

    Bartman et al. (2016), p. 275.

  113. 113.

    Bartman et al. (2016), p. 275.

  114. 114.

    Bartman et al. (2016), p. 86.

  115. 115.

    Directive 2004/25/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 April 2004 on takeover bids.

  116. 116.

    Art. 1:1 Act on Financial Supervision (Wet financieel toezicht).

  117. 117.

    Bartman et al. (2016), p. 87.

  118. 118.

    Art. 2:343 DCC.

  119. 119.

    Supreme Court (HR) 12 July 2013, ECLI:NL:HR:2013:BZ9145, NJ 2013/461 (Veb/KLM).

  120. 120.

    Supreme Court (HR) 14 September 2007, ECLI:NL:HR:2007:BA4117, JOR 2007/237, m.nt. Assink (Versatel); Bartman et al. (2016), p. 86.

  121. 121.

    Art. 2:15-1 sub b DCC.

  122. 122.

    Supreme Court (HR) 1 March 2002, ECLI:NL:HR:2002:AD9857, NJ 2002/296 (Zwagerman).

  123. 123.

    Supreme Court (HR) 12 July 2013, ECLI:NL:HR:2013:BZ9145, NJ 2013/461 (Veb/KLM). See about this amongst others Abma et al. (2017), p. 154.

  124. 124.

    Art. 2:107/217/2 DCC.

  125. 125.

    Supreme Court (HR) 9 July 2010, ECLI:NL:HR:2010:BM0976, JOR 2010/228 (ASMI).

  126. 126.

    Art. 2:346DCC.

  127. 127.

    There is no comparable provision applicable to private limited liability companies.

  128. 128.

    Bartman et al. (2016), p. 89.

  129. 129.

    Or non-executives in case of a one tier board.

  130. 130.

    See about consolidation of insolvent estates Reumers (2007).

  131. 131.

    Bartman (2015), pp. 806–812 with reference to Reumers (2007).

  132. 132.

    See for example Court of Appeal of the Hague 31 May 2011, JOR 2012/269. See also Hoge Raad (Supreme Court) 25 September 1987, NJ 1998/136. See for further reflections on this Bartman et al. (2016), p. 348.

  133. 133.

    Bartman et al. (2016), p. 38.

  134. 134.

    See art. 42 and 43-1, 6e of the Bankruptcy Act (Faillissementswet) and art. 3:45 and 46-1,6e DCC for the action Pauliana outside of bankruptcy.

  135. 135.

    Regulation (EU) 2015/848 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 May 2015 on insolvency proceedings (recast).

  136. 136.

    Law of 13 December 2017, concerning the execution of Regulation (EU) 2015/848 of The European Parliament and the Council of 20 May 2015 concerning insolvency proceedings (PbEU 2015, L 141) (Uitvoeringswet EU-insolventieverordening), Staatsblad 2017/497.

  137. 137.

    Art. 2:381-3 DCC see for an unofficial translation http://www.dutchcivillaw.com/civilcodebook022.htm.

  138. 138.

    Art. 2:375 and 2:376 DCC.

  139. 139.

    Art. 2:377-5 DCC.

  140. 140.

    Kamerstukken II 2018/2019, 35058, nr. 2 on the implementation of Directive (EU) 2017/828 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 May 2017 amending Directive 2007/36/EC as regards the encouragement of long-term shareholder engagement.

  141. 141.

    Art. 2:137/247 DCC.

  142. 142.

    See for an inquiry procedure in which related party transactions played a role Enterprise Chamber, Court of Amsterdam (OK) 7 January 1988, ECLI:NL:GHAMS:1988:AB9641, TVVS 1988, p. 311 (Bredero I).; Enterprise Chamber, Court of Amsterdam (OK) 17 April 1997, ECLI:NL:GHAMS:1997:AD2721, JOR 1997/81, m.nt. Van den Ingh (Bobel); Hof Amsterdam (OK) 24 April 2017, ECLI:NL:GHAMS:2017:1626 (Fortuna).

  143. 143.

    See in this respect Bartman et al. (2016), pp. 19–22.

  144. 144.

    Art. 10:118 DCC.

  145. 145.

    Art. 10:119 DCC.

  146. 146.

    Art. 10:121 DCC.

  147. 147.

    Kramer and Verhagen (2015), nr. 79. However, depending on the circumstances of the case it is not excluded that these issues would fall under the rules of incorporation.

  148. 148.

    See for an unofficial translation of the Dutch legislation which has been used as a source of inspiration throughout this chapter http://www.dutchcivillaw.com/civilcodebook022.htm.

  149. 149.

    Supreme Court (HR) 4 February 2005, NJ 2005/127, m.nt. J.M.M. Maijer (Landis).

  150. 150.

    See in this respect Bartman (2016/77); Kemp and Olaerts (2017), p. 156; Bartman et al. (2016), p. 291.

  151. 151.

    Supreme Court (HR) 4 February 2005, NJ 2005/127, m.nt. J.M.M. Maijer (Landis). See in this respect Bartman et al. (2016), p. 292.

  152. 152.

    Supreme Court (HR) 23 March 2013, NJ 2013/304, m.nt. Van Schilfgaarde (Chinese Workers).

  153. 153.

    Supreme Court (Hoge Raad) 23 March 2013, NJ 2013/304, m.nt. Van Schilfgaarde (Chinese Workers).

  154. 154.

    See in this sense Bartman (2016/77).

References

  • Abma R, Van Kleef DP, Lemmers N, Olaerts M (2017) De algemene vergadering van Nederlandse beursvennootschappen. Wolters Kluwer, Deventer

    Google Scholar 

  • Assink BF, Slagter WJ (2013) Compendium Ondernemingsrecht (Deel 2). Wolters Kluwer, Deventer

    Google Scholar 

  • Bartman SM (2004) Voorbij NV en BV; Over corporate governance en het tekort van ons vennootschapsrecht. Wolters Kluwer, Deventer

    Google Scholar 

  • Bartman SM (2015) De 403-verklaring: hoofdelijkheid of borgtocht? Een napleitexercitie. Ars Aequi:806–812

    Google Scholar 

  • Bartman SM (2016) Hoge Raad weet zich niet goed raad met het concern. Ondernemingsrecht 2016(77):365–370

    Google Scholar 

  • Bartman SM, Dorresteijn AFM, Olaerts M (2016) Van het concern. Wolters Kluwer, Deventer

    Google Scholar 

  • Bier B, Quist PHN (2016) (Groeps)structuur. In: Bier B, Van Olffen M, Snijder-Kuipers B (eds) Handboek notarieel ondernemingsrecht. Wolters Kluwer, Deventer

    Google Scholar 

  • Boschma HE (2015) De (aansprakelijkheids)positie van de bestuurder van een concerndochter. Risico’s, valkuilen en vangnetten. NTBR 2015(17):112–121

    Google Scholar 

  • Dahmen RGM (2014) De aanwijzingsbevoegdheid van het gewijzigde artikel 2:239-4 BW: toepassing, toetsing, afdwingbaarheid en aspecten van aansprakelijkheid in concernperspectief. TvOB 2014(2):61–71

    Google Scholar 

  • Dorresteijn AFM (2017a) Art. 2:24a BW, aant. 6. In: Huizink JB (ed) Groene Serie Rechtspersonen. Wolters Kluwer, Deventer

    Google Scholar 

  • Dorresteijn AFM (2017b) Art. 2:24a BW, aant. 7. In: Huizink JB (ed) Groene Serie Rechtspersonen. Wolters Kluwer, Deventer

    Google Scholar 

  • Dortmond P (e.o) (2013) Handboek voor de naamloze en de besloten vennootschap. Wolters Kluwer, Deventer

    Google Scholar 

  • Huizink JB (2017a) Art. 2:129 BW, aant. 11.10. In: Huizink JB (ed) Groene Serie Rechtspersonen. Wolters Kluwer, Deventer

    Google Scholar 

  • Huizink JB (2017b) Art. 2:129 BW, aant. 11.7. In: Huizink JB (ed) Groene Serie Rechtspersonen. Wolters Kluwer, Deventer

    Google Scholar 

  • Huizink JB (2017c) Art. 2:138 BW, aant. 28.3. In: Huizink JB (ed) Groene Serie Rechtspersonen. Wolters Kluwer, Deventer

    Google Scholar 

  • Huizink JB (2017d) Art. 2:138 BW, aant. 30. In: Huizink JB (ed) Groene Serie Rechtspersonen. Wolters Kluwer, Deventer

    Google Scholar 

  • IJsselmuiden Th S (2005) art. 2:406 BW, aant. 2.1. In: Huizink JB (ed) Groene Serie Rechtspersonen. Wolters Kluwer, Deventer

    Google Scholar 

  • Kemp B, Olaerts M (2017) Substance over form in various aspects of cross-border company groups. In: Koster H e.o. (ed) Essays on private & business law. Eleven International Publishing, The Hague, pp 154–163

    Google Scholar 

  • Kiersch EDG (2017) Art. 2:406 BW. In: Krans HB, Stolker CJJM, Valk WL (eds) Tekst & Commentaar Burgerlijk Wetboek. Wolters Kluwer, Deventer

    Google Scholar 

  • Kramer XE, Verhagen HLE (m.m.v. S. van Dongen, A.P.M.J. Vonken) (2015) Mr. C. Assers Handleiding tot de beoefening van het Nederlands Burgerlijk recht. 10. Internationaal privaatrecht. Deel III. Internationaal vermogensrecht. Wolters Kluwer, Deventer

    Google Scholar 

  • Olaerts M (2018) Dutch National Report on company groups for the international academy of comparative law. In: Van Vliet PW (ed) The Netherlands Reports to the twentieth international congress of comparative law, Fukuoka 2018. Wolf Legal Publishing, Oisterwijk, pp 107–134

    Google Scholar 

  • Raaijmakers MJGC (2015) Bestuursautonomie in een (gezamenlijke) dochter-BV: een novum in concernverhoudingen? TvOB 2015(1):2–12

    Google Scholar 

  • Reumers MLH (2007) Samengevoegde afwikkeling van faillissementen (diss. Rotterdam), deel 61 IVO-reeks. Wolters Kluwer, Deventer

    Google Scholar 

  • Van der Sangen GJH (2009) Concernleiding en aansprakelijkheid: het delicate evenwicht tussen unitaire leiding en juridische zelfstandigheid. TvOB 2009(6):146–153

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Schilfgaarde P, Winter J, Wezeman JB, Schoonbroood J (2017) Van de BV en de NV. Wolters Kluwer, Deventer

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Solinge G, Nieuwe Weme MP (m.m.v. R.G.J. Nowak) (2009) Mr. C. Assers Handleiding tot de beoefening van het Nederlands Burgerlijk Recht. 2. Rechtspersonenrecht. Deel II. De naamloze en de besloten vennootschap. Wolters Kluwer, Deventer

    Google Scholar 

  • Verdam AF e.o. (2015) Autonomie van het bestuur en haar grenzen voor en na de Cancun-uitspraak. Wolters Kluwer, Deventer

    Google Scholar 

  • Zaal I (2014) De Reikwijdte van medezeggenschap (diss. Amsterdam UvA). Wolters Kluwer, Deventer

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Private Law, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands

    Mieke Olaerts

Authors
  1. Mieke Olaerts
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mieke Olaerts .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. University of Buenos Aires, Buenos Aires, Argentina

    Rafael Mariano Manóvil

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Olaerts, M. (2020). National Report on the Netherlands. In: Manóvil, R.M. (eds) Groups of Companies. Ius Comparatum - Global Studies in Comparative Law, vol 43. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-36697-1_15

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-36697-1_15

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-36696-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-36697-1

  • eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation