Earlier this year, DLA Piper provided a multi-jurisdictional overview of the implementation of the UBO register in several EEA jurisdictions, including the Netherlands, the United Kingdom, France and Germany. Furthermore, DLA Piper Netherlands submitted some critical remarks as a response to the Dutch draft legislative proposal for implementation of the UBO register. According to the […]
Author's posts listings
In the beginning of this year, we posted a blog concerning the duty of disclosure of information of insurers regarding profiteering policies. Our conclusion: discords between several judicial authorities bring uncertainty to the position of insurers in the profiteering policy conflicts. We anticipated that the coming judgements might eliminate this uncertainty. What happened in the meantime?
Several (sometimes contradictory) rulings of district courts and a court of appeal were published. Furthermore – and more importantly – the Rotterdam district court published its ruling on the longstanding dispute between insurer Nationale-Nederlanden Levensverzekering Maatschappij N.V. (“NN”) and interest group Woekerpolis.nl. In this dispute, Woekerpolis.nl represents hundreds of thousands profiteering policy holders.
The legislation that is applicable to the payment services market is currently subject to a lot of developments. In this blog an overview is provided of the highlights with regard to the development as of the first Payment Services Directive until the final draft regulatory technical standards published by the European Banking Authority on 23 February 2017. In the below overview, particular attention is dedicated to the first Dutch draft of legislation for the second Payment Services Directive, that was published for consultation in November 2016.
Within fourteen days, two different views on the duty of disclosure regarding profiteering policies were published. Opposite to the ruling of the Kifid, the District Court ruled in a similar case that the insurer had no additional duty of disclosure. This discords between the Kifid ruling and the District Court ruling bring uncertainty to the position of insurers that provided similar profiteering policies around the same issue date.