Bart van der Wiel

Represented ING Bank in Dutch Supreme Court proceedings to clarify the question: under what circumstances can the bank set off payments, which come into a borrower's account, against granted credit in case of a rescue attempt followed by insolvency? The Supreme Court clarifies when good faith required for set-off is present and formulates the principle that a bank that has good reason to believe that a rescue attempt has a real chance of success is acting in good faith. The guidance provided by the Supreme Court's judgment is of great importance for banking practice. 

Represented Capgemini at the Dutch Supreme Court in a dispute on the execution of a large-scale software development project.

Represented Samruk-Kazyna JSC in Dutch Supreme Court proceedings against a creditor of its shareholder, the Republic of Kazakhstan, on the legitimacy of attachments levied on all shares held by Samruk-Kazyna  in a Dutch company.

Represented ING Bank in various Dutch Supreme Court proceedings in which important questions have been answered for the banking practice. These proceedings concerned, for example, the regulations regarding cashless payments, the terminability of a banking relationship and the validity of security interests.

Represented India in an annulment dispute worth upwards of EUR 1 billion before the Dutch Supreme Court

 

Represented Wells in the Wells v Bariven case in proceedings before the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court reinstated the arbitral award after it was set aside for alleged corruption.

Represented CBRE in proceedings before the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court upheld the Court of Appeal's judgment which found that CBRE Investors does not have to offer properties to Bijenkorf.