HDK is proud to announce its ranking and recommendation as a leading law firm in The Legal 500 EMEA 2018, published today.

HDK has been recommended in the field of employment law:

“Consistently acting for high-profile clients on reorganisations and in litigation, ‘pragmatic, highly experienced’ employment boutique HDK Advocaten also advises domestic and international law firms on the employment aspects of cross-border M&A.” HDK’s clients instructed the team on “contentious and non-contentious matters.”

We are also proud to announce that both Juliette Huyzer and Michiel Koole have been personally recommended by The Legal 500: “The ‘very senior, proficient, service-oriented’ Juliette Huyzer leads the group; Michiel Koole is ‘very patient and level-headed’.”

HDK thanks its clients and referees for their continued support.

                

 

HDK is proud to announce its ranking and recommendation as a leading law firm in the recently published edition of The Legal 500 EMEA 2016.

In addition, we are proud to announce that Juliette Huyzer is included as a “highly recommended and leading lawyer” in the 2016 Chambers Europe legal directory.

Strengths

“What I really like about HDK Advocaten, why I use it, is that it has a really pragmatic approach. It gives you really solid, clear-cut advice, without a lot of ambiguity.”

“I think that its big strength is that it is very communicative. You can always reach the lawyers.”

Notable practitioners 

Juliette Huyzer has wide-ranging expertise which includes transfers and restructuring, employee benefits, collective dismissals and co-determination. Clients say “she really stands out. She’s incredibly driven, helpful and very pragmatic. I really like working with her.”

HDK thanks its clients and referees for their continued support.

Please see more at:
Legal 500
Chambers & Partners

 

The first decision under the Work and Security Act (‘WWZ’) regarding the probationary period has been published. The case can be summarized as follows:

As of 1 March 2015, an employer and employee concluded an employment agreement for a definite period of six months with a probationary period of one month. During the probationary period, the employer terminated the employment agreement for business economical reasons. The employee however argued that the probationary period was null and void.

The cantonal court ruled in summary proceedings that as of 1 January 2015 no probationary period can be agreed upon in employment agreements with a fixed term of six months or less. The probationary period therefore is null and void and consequently, the employer needed to have a dismissal permit of the Employee Insurance Agency (‘UWV’) to validly terminate the employment agreement. Since the permission of the UWV is also lacking, the cantonal court ruled that the dismissal was not in accordance with Dutch law. Therefore, the employee is entitled to amongst others payment of wages. The employee’s request to re-employment was granted as well. The employer’s argument that there is no work cannot be invoked against this employee according to the judge.

According to HDK Advocaten it is impractical for employers to conclude employment agreements of exactly six months. On the one hand a probationary period is null and void and on the other hand the employer has the obligation to notify the employee in writing whether the employment agreement will be extended after the term (this applies to contracts of six months or longer).

On May 13, 2015 two court decisions regarding the new Work and Security Act (WWZ) have been published. Both decisions involve the obligation of the employer to observe a one-month notice period, which applies as per 1 January 2015. The employer must inform the employee in writing not later than one month before the fixed term employment agreement terminates by operation of law whether the employment will be continued and, if so, under what terms and conditions. Employers who do not comply with this provision risk being held liable for up to one month’s salary.

The cantonal court divisions both ruled that, until 1 July 2015,  claims against the notice period must be submitted by means of a summons. As of 1 July 2015, the second tranche of the WWZ will become effective, due to which this procedure must be commenced by means of a request procedure, within two months after the termination of the employment contract.

In one decision the cantonal court decided that the employer did not comply with this provision and was held liable for one month’s salary since the employment contract was terminated on February 28, 2015 and the employee has not been informed in advance about the continuation or termination of the contract. In the other decision it was decided that the compensation was not owed since the employer was not required to give the employee advance notice since the employment contract terminated on 31 January 2015. In accordance with transitional law (article XXIId), the compensation is only due if the employment contract terminates on or after 1 February 2015.