1. Home
  2. |Insights
  3. |HR Implications of the Summer Agreement

HR Implications of the Summer Agreement

Event | 12.13.17, 10:30 AM CET - 1:00 PM CET

Address

Crowell & Moring
Rue Joseph Stevens 7, 1000 Brussels, Belgium

Register

In July this year, the Belgian federal government reached a budgetary agreement that will lead to significant socioeconomic reforms. By December, most of the relevant legislative texts will have been implemented, and on December 13, Crowell & Moring has invited two Advisors from the Federation of Enterprises in Belgium (FEB / VBO) to discuss the HR related reforms. In the company of these knowledgeable and experienced professionals, we will bring you up to speed on new developments such as those regarding new notice periods, a new tax-friendly company profit premium, a new right for employees to be offline and related anti-burnout measures, mystery calls from the social inspection unit, the new ‘cash for car’ principle, the impact of GDPR on HR, etc.

 


In addition to updating you on these important topics, this seminar will also give you an opportunity to exchange best practices and network with likeminded professionals. To accommodate all our guests, our presentations will be in Dutch and French, and materials will be supplied in English.

 


Speakers


Monica De Jonghe and Marie-Noëlle Vanderhoven, Senior Advisers for the Federation of Enterprises in Belgium (VBO / FEB)

 


The Labor & Employment team of Crowell & Moring’s Brussels Office, headed by Emmanuel Plasschaert.


For more information, please visit these areas: Labor and Employment

Contact

Participants

Insights

Event | 02.20.25

Has the Buss Stopped? Recoupment Today

Has the Buss Stopped? Recoupment Today: In 1997, the California Supreme Court decided Buss v. Superior Court. In Buss, the court concluded that a liability insurer that defended a mixed action could seek reimbursement from the insured for the defense costs associated with the claims that were not even potentially covered. Since then, numerous courts have held that insurers are entitled to recoup their defense costs associated with uncovered claims or causes of action. On the other hand, a significant number of courts have rejected insurers’ right to recoupment, at least in the absence of a policy provision granting the insurer that right. Some commentators have even suggested that the current judicial trend might be away from permitting insurers to recoup their defense costs. Is that correct? Has the Buss stopped? This panel of coverage experts will analyze insurers’ claimed right to recoupment today, and offer their perspectives on what the law on recoupment should perhaps be and might be in the future.

View All Insights