Case 1:19-cv-11586-FDS Document 220-4 Filed 08/11/21 Page 1 of 17
`Case 1:19-cv-11586-FDS Document 220-4 Filed 08/11/21 Page 1 of 17
`
`EXHIBIT 1.C
`EXHIBIT 1.C
`
`

`

`Case 1:19-cv-11586-FDS Document 220-4 Filed 08/11/21 Page 2 of 17
`
`
`
`TRANSLATION CERTIFICATION
`
`Date: August 10, 2021
`
`To whom it may concern:
`This is to certify that the attached translation is an accurate representation of the documents
`received by this office. The translation was completed from:
`• Dutch
`To:
`• English
`The documents are designated as:
`• Rapport dit is een advocaat - oktober 2013 - 5.3 - 5.5
`• Rechtersregelingen in het burgerlijk (proces)recht (Burgerlijk Proces &amp Praktijk nr.
`II), 7.5.2
`• WvSv A.L. MelaiM.S. Groenhuijsen e.a
`
`Eugene Li, Project Manager in this company, attests to the following:
`“To the best of my knowledge, the aforementioned documents are a true, full and accurate
`translation of the specified documents.”
`
`
`
`
`Signature of Eugene Li
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`

`

`Case 1:19-cv-11586-FDS Document 220-4 Filed 08/11/21 Page 3 of 17
`
`
`This is an attorney-at-law
`
`
`
`
`Report by the Commission “What is an attorney-at-law?”
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`The Hague, October 2013
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`1
`
`

`

`Case 1:19-cv-11586-FDS Document 220-4 Filed 08/11/21 Page 4 of 17
`
`Table of contents
`
`
`Preface .................................................................................................................................................................................. 4
`2. Action plan ...................................................................................................................................................................... 6
` 2.1. Reason ...................................................................................................................................................................... 6
` 2.2. Commission's mission and deliverable ...................................................................................................... 6
` 2.4. Perspectives on the attorney-at-law and his profession..................................................................... 8
`3 The attorney-at-law in historical perspective ............................................................................................... 10
` 3.1. Introduction ........................................................................................................................................................ 10
` 3.2 Establishment of the profession (ca. 1500-1811) ............................................................................... 10
` 3.3. The 'Napoleonic' professional image of the attorney-at-law (1811-1879) ............................. 12
` 3.4. Emancipation of the Attorney-at-law Profession (1879-1970) .................................................... 12
` 3.5 Modernization in the twentieth century (1970-present) ................................................................. 13
` 3.6 Professional secrecy ......................................................................................................................................... 14
` 3.7 Conclusion ............................................................................................................................................................ 15
`4 The attorney-at-law from a legal perspective ................................................................................................ 17
` 4.1 The attorney-at-law as a legal subject ...................................................................................................... 17
` 4.2. Lack of legal definition ................................................................................................................................... 17
` 4.3 Formal and substantive attorney-at-law’s concept............................................................................. 17
` 4.4 Capacity in relation to professional practice ......................................................................................... 19
` 4.5 Shadow of the law ............................................................................................................................................. 20
` 4.6 Professional characteristics: the privileges ............................................................................................ 22
` 4.7 The domain monopoly .................................................................................................................................... 23
` 4.8 The consultancy practice................................................................................................................................ 24
` 4.9 The advising attorney-at-law and right of nondisclosure ................................................................ 25
` 4.10 The influence of the disciplinary assessment ..................................................................................... 27
` 4.11 Professional secrecy and the nature of the right of nondisclosure ............................................ 28
` 4.12 Honest use of professional secrecy ......................................................................................................... 29
` 4.13 Abuse outside of criminal law? ................................................................................................................. 33
` 4.14 Conclusion ......................................................................................................................................................... 35
`5. The attorney-at-law in economic perspective .............................................................................................. 37
` 5.1. Scale increase ..................................................................................................................................................... 37
` 5.2. Attorney-at-law as a company .................................................................................................................... 37
` 5.3. A liberal profession? ........................................................................................................................................ 38
` 5.4. The Working Group-Cohen .......................................................................................................................... 38
` 5.5. Attorney-at-law in Employment ................................................................................................................ 39
` 5.6. The task and role of the attorney-at-law according to European case law .............................. 41
` 5.7. Ancillary relationships of an attorney-at-law ....................................................................................... 43
` 5.8. The attorney-at-law-tax adviser ................................................................................................................ 45
` 5.9. Relationship between practice and sideline activity ......................................................................... 46
` 5.10 Applicability of the disciplinary law to ancillary activities ........................................................... 47
` 5.11 Conclusions ....................................................................................................................................................... 48
`6. The attorney-at-law in a constitutional perspective .................................................................................. 50
` 6.1. General principles of the rule of law ........................................................................................................ 50
` 6.2 The rule of law and the position of the attorney-at-law ................................................................... 50
` 6.3 Points of attention from the point of view of the rule of law .......................................................... 51
` 6.4 International Attorney-at-law Profile ....................................................................................................... 52
` 6.5 The 'European' attorney-at-law? ................................................................................................................ 53
` 6.6. Quest for Common Principles...................................................................................................................... 55
`7. Conclusions and recommendations .................................................................................................................. 57
` 7.1. An overview ........................................................................................................................................................ 57
` 7.2. The attorney-at-law as mediator in the rule of law ........................................................................... 57
`
`
`
`
`
`2
`
`

`

`Case 1:19-cv-11586-FDS Document 220-4 Filed 08/11/21 Page 5 of 17
`
`
` 7.3. Mediator role implies independence ....................................................................................................... 58
` 7.4. Right of nondisclosure.................................................................................................................................... 59
` 7.5. A definition? ........................................................................................................................................................ 59
` 7.6. Recommendations ........................................................................................................................................... 60
`Annex I. European Professional Titles……………………………………………………………………………………62
`
`
`
`3
`
`

`

`Case 1:19-cv-11586-FDS Document 220-4 Filed 08/11/21 Page 6 of 17
`
`According to settled case law, economic activity should be understood to mean any activity consisting
`in offering goods and services on a particular market. Attorneys-at-law provide legal aid services for
`remuneration; moreover, they bear the financial risks associated with carrying out these activities,
`because in the event of a difference between expenditure and income they themselves have to bear
`the deficit. It follows, according to the Court of Justice, that attorneys-at-law registered in the
`Netherlands are engaged in an economic activity and are therefore enterprises within the meaning of
`the Treaty; this does not alter the fact that their services are complex and technical in nature, nor that
`the exercise of their profession is subject to rules.89
`
`
`
`5.3. A liberal profession?
`
`For an attorney-at-law, entrepreneurship means first and foremost that his business operations must
`be aimed at the continuity of the company. It is obvious that the aim is to maximize profit. How this
`develops in practice can be deduced from the free hourly rate used. At the end of 1995, the General
`Council last published a reference rate. The calculation schedule was replaced by a description of the
`most common expense methods, with the strong recommendation that every attorney-at-law make
`a written declaration agreement with the client at the start of a case. With effect from 1997 it was left
`to each attorney-at-law to calculate his own individual basic hourly rate on the basis of his cost.90 In a
`regulation, limits have been set on what the attorney-at-law may agree with the client in the field of
`result-dependent remuneration.
`
`Partly under the influence of the report of the Cohen working group, the legal profession has started
`to focus more on the functioning of the free market. The regulations with regard to attorney-at-law’
`fees are therefore still purely deontologically founded. The NOvA's (the Dutch Bar Association)
`involvement is limited to an anti-abuse scheme for result-dependent declarations,91 offering a dispute
`settlement scheme and describing the most common declaration methods. However, the basic
`principle remains that the attorney-at-law’s fee is “reasonable”. That is the background behind the
`settled case law that the disciplinary court is not authorized to settle claim disputes, but does guard
`against excessive claiming.
`
`The release of the hourly rate, but also the repeal of the publicity regulation in 2007, which, among
`other things, lifted the advertising ban for attorneys-at-law, confirm that attorney-at-law is a liberal
`profession. That also means free establishment. Pursuant to the Attorneys-at-law Act, “everyone” is
`authorized to apply for registration as an attorney-at-law with the court of the district in which one
`wishes to have an office.92 After being sworn in and registered as an attorney-at-law, one can establish
`himself anywhere. Unlike civil-law notaries, who are legally discharged at the age of 70, attorneys-at-
`law have no age limit.
`
`5.4. The Cohen Working Group
`
`The Kok cabinet asked the Cohen working group to investigate to what extent it is possible and useful
`– while preserving the quality of the administration of justice – to promote competition between
`providers of legal aid.93 A related case to be studied concerned the exclusive position of the attorney-
`at-law of civil and criminal procedure. The working group found that
`
`--------------------------------------------------
`89 ECJ February 19, 2002, Wouters e.a., legal consideration 46-49.
`90 T. de Waard, “Exit basic hourly rate”, Adv.blad 1995, p. 833.
`91 The regulation that will allow, by way of experiment, result-related remuneration in personal injury practice
`with effect from January 1, 2014, was also mainly designed to prevent abuse of the thus permitted form of
`remuneration.
`92 Provided, of course, that the legal training requirements are met and that a possible criminal record does not
`stand in the way of that registration.
`93 Report of the interdepartmental working group Domeinmonopolie Advocatuur (Domain Monopoly for the
`Legal Profession), June 27, 1995, p. 4.
`
`
`
`38
`
`

`

`Case 1:19-cv-11586-FDS Document 220-4 Filed 08/11/21 Page 7 of 17
`
`
`
`the problem in the legal aid market was caused by the fact that it was practically impossible for
`employed attorneys-at-law to register as attorneys-at-law. However, the working group was not in
`favor of the alternative of abolishing mandatory legal representation: “The public interest, which is
`served by a free, independent and accessible administration of justice as well as an orderly course of
`dispute settlement, requires that in certain civil and in criminal proceedings the citizen must be
`provided with expert assistance. Abolition of the principle of mandatory legal representation can only
`take place under the condition that the legal rules are so simple that the principles of “fair trial” and
`“equality of arms” can be done justice even without mandatory expert assistance.”94
`
`The working group did recommend a reassessment of the scope of the obligation to provide legal
`representation. After all, it had been established that the dividing line between cases with mandatory
`legal representation and cases where that obligation did not apply was not always convincing.
`
`5.5. Attorney-at-law in Employment
`
`Another characteristic of the “classic” small-scale legal profession is the lack of formal corporate
`structures. In the 20th century, an attorney-at-law could be assisted by a “junior”, for whose
`performance he was responsible. Until the 1950s there was no compulsory internship; compulsory
`vocational training is of an even later date, so that the phenomenon of the trainee attorney-at-law
`only reached its full maturity in the second half of the last century.95 According to the current state of
`the case law, no distinction is made between trainee attorneys-at-law , employees, or partners when
`it comes to disciplinary review of their actions. The Advocatenwet (Attorneys-at-law Act) also does
`not provide for a phasing of entry into the legal profession.96 Swearing in as an attorney-at-law,
`followed by registration at the bar, is sufficient to acquire the status of an attorney-at-law with all the
`powers and obligations that entails. In a sense, being a trainee attorney-at-law, employee or partner
`now form more financially and economically determined stages in an attorney-at-law's career.
`
` A
`
` special figure is the attorney-at-law in employment, i.e. one who works outside the contours of a
`law firm. Traditionally, attorneys-at-law who practiced in employment were only tolerated.97 Around
`1970, this changed. First, the Supreme Court had already ruled in 1957 that salaried employment could
`not give rise to opposition.98 The NOvA subsequently adopted a regulation that more or less precluded
`practice in specific employment, i.e. other than employed by a law firm. The attorney-at-law in
`employment was only recognized in the NOvA regulation on the initiative of the Cohen working group
`(which is why they were also called Cohen attorneys-at-law, a term that now seems to have gone out
`of fashion.) This regulation is a further regulation to the general rule that an attorney-at-law may not
`practice in employment if this jeopardizes the freedom and independence in the exercise of his
`profession, including the representation of the party’s interests and the related relationship of trust
`between the attorney-at-law and his client.99
`
`There are two main forms of attorneys-at-law in employment, as they have been admitted since 1996:
`
`-------------------------------------------------------
`94 Ibid., p. 4-5.
`95 It was different in Napoleonic France, where the apprenticeship was prescribed. After 1838, the internship in
`Regulation III did not return and we had to wait until the Attorneys-at-law Act created the possibility to create
`an internship by regulation. Incidentally, the first traineeship regulation adopted was annulled because of a
`violation of the law.
`96 The exception is the provision that registration is initially conditional.
`97 HR November 10, 1939, Advocatenblad 1940, p. 92.
`98 HR February 22, 1957, NJ 1957, 212.
`99 Art. 2 Regulation on the practice in employment. In a sense, this regulation repeats the conditions under which
`the Supreme Court and the Court of Discipline deem admission to the bar acceptable.
`
`
`
`39
`
`

`

`Case 1:19-cv-11586-FDS Document 220-4 Filed 08/11/21 Page 8 of 17
`
`
`
`in the first place, the company attorney-at-law or the attorney-at-law of a government body who is
`admitted to the bar.100 This attorney-at-law is only authorized to act exclusively for his employer within
`that employment relationship, with activities that are mainly aimed at the performance of the legal
`practice. Secondly, there is the attorney-at-law employed by a legal aid insurer or other employer,
`whereby that attorney-at-law provides legal assistance on behalf of the employer or third parties, for
`example the members of the trade union where the attorney-at-law is employed or the insured
`persons with a legal aid insurer.101
`
`The issue of the required independence in the practice of attorneys-at-law in employment has been
`explicitly discussed in European case law. In the judgment in the AM&S case to be discussed in the
`next chapter, the Court of Justice held in 1982 that the principle of protection of the correspondence
`between an attorney-at-law and his client is recognized in the law of all Member States, but that the
`scope and the criteria for its application differ.102 For entitlement to the protection of confidentiality
`(legal privilege), the Court of Justice set the conditions that the communication with the attorney-at-
`law relates to the rights of the defense of the client; and that it concerns communication with an
`independent attorney-at-law. Employed attorneys-at-law cannot be equated with outside attorneys-
`at-law in terms of independence, since the requirement of independence presupposes that there is
`no employment relationship between the attorney-at-law and his client.
`
`In 2010, the Court of Appeal reiterated this judgment in the Akzo judgment103, in the sense that the
`second condition is based on the attorney-at-law's role as an assistant in the administration of justice,
`who is wholly independent and must provide the assistance required by his client in the predominant
`interest of justice. The Court has also held that the fact that the attorney-at-law is employed means
`that he cannot deviate from the commercial strategies followed by his employer, which jeopardizes
`his independence. The question that has occupied the legal profession since then is the scope of the
`Akzo judgment and its applicability to Dutch legal practice in which the employed attorney-at-law had
`meanwhile acquired a formal status.
`
`In 2013, the Supreme Court answered this question by ruling in the Delta judgment104 that the court
`– this concerned leapfrogging appeals in cassation – wrongly assumed that competition law
`jurisprudence of the CJEU, in which an attorney-at-law in employment was denied a right of
`nondisclosure. that under Dutch law “for an attorney-at-law in employment with regard to
`communication with his client, the company where he works, does not have the privilege of
`nondisclosure” (legal consideration 13).
`
`The Supreme Court stated the following:
`
`5.4 In the Netherlands it has been accepted for some time that an attorney-at-law can be
`
`employed (HR November 10, 1939, Advocatenblad 1940, p. 92/93, and HR February 22, 1957, NJ
`1957/212).
`Also some time ago, the Board of Representatives of the NOvA established public law
`
`regulations to which the attorney-at-law in employment and his employer are bound (the
`Regulation
`on the attorney-at-law in employment of June 17, 1977, and the Regulation on the
`practice of
`employment of November 27, 1996). Pursuant to art. 3 paragraph 3 of the latter
`Regulation,
`the employer of an attorney-at-law in employment is obliged to sign a professional
`statute and commit
`himself to it in order to respect an independent practice and the undisturbed
`
`-----------------------------------------
`100 See art. 3 paragraph 2 Regulation on the practice in employment.
`101 Art. 3 paragraph 1 in conjunction with. art. 3 paragraph 4 Regulation on the practice in employment.
`102 ECJ May 18, 1982, no. 155/79, NJ 1983, 150.
`103 CJEU September 14, 2010, no. C-550/07 P (Akzo Nobel v Commission), NJ 2010, 629.
`104 HR Mar 15, 2013, LJN BY6101.
`
`
`
`40
`
`

`

`Case 1:19-cv-11586-FDS Document 220-4 Filed 08/11/21 Page 9 of 17
`
`
`
`
`
`compliance with the attorney-at-law’s professional rules and rules of conduct, including those
`
`relating to his duty of confidentiality and non-disclosure. (…)
`
`5.5 In view of Dutch practice and the guarantees that thus exist in the Netherlands with
`
`regard to the manner in which attorneys-at-law in employment practice, there is no ground
`
`to deny a
`attorney-at-law the right of nondisclosure on the sole fact that he is employed.
`
`The Supreme Court attached special value to the professional statute, which must form a guarantee
`for independent practice in the relationship between attorney-at-law and client (employer). It
`therefore appears that the attorney-at-law in employment can also count on the fact that
`confidentiality is protected, outside European competition law, because, in the opinion of the
`Supreme Court, independence is sufficiently guaranteed in Dutch practice.
`
`5.6. The task and role of the attorney-at-law according to European case law
`
`European competition law has not only influenced the position of the attorney-at-law in employment.
`In a broad sense, the Court of Justice ruled in the Wouters judgment on the interpretation of the
`significance of the NOvA regulations in the light of European competition law. In his Opinion to this
`judgment, Advocate General at the European Court of Justice Léger discussed in detail the job
`description and the basis of the attorney-at-law and his task in the service of the public interest:
`
`[173] (…) In order to guarantee the principle of the rule of law, the Member States have set
`
`up various courts. They have also formulated the principle that individuals should be able to
`
`apply to those authorities in all circumstances in order to have their rights recognized and
`
`respected.
`
`[174] However, given the complexity of legislation and the organization of the judiciary,
`
`individuals are rarely able to assert their rights themselves. The attorney-at-law will provide
`
`them with
`the necessary assistance in this regard. Incidentally, the Court regards attorneys-at-
`law as auxiliary bodies of the judiciary (179) and assistants in the administration of justice.
`
`[175] It follows that the attorney-at-law carries out activities that are of essential importance
`in a state
`governed by the rule of law. It enables individuals to better know, understand and
`exercise
`the rights conferred on them. In other words, in a constitutional state, the attorney-
`at-law guarantees
`the effectiveness of the principle of access for individuals to the law and the
`courts.
`[176] In view of these aspects, the attorney-at-law carries out activities that “serve a general
`
`interest which distinguishes it from other economic activities”.105
`economic
`
`The AM&S judgment from 1982 was decisive, especially for the scope of the non-disclosure right.106
`The Australian Mining & Smelting Europe Limited (AM&S) based in the United Kingdom argued -
`following an investigation into the imminent consultation of a number of documents invoked under
`legal privilege - common to all Member States by virtue of a general principle that correspondence
`between an attorney-at-law and his client is protected in all Member States, although the extent and
`manner in which this protection is achieved, varies by Member State. This principle would also apply
`within Community law “within possible limits”.
`
`The CJEU stated thus: “Community law, which arises from not only economic but also legal
`interweaving of the Member States, must take into account the principles and concepts common to
`the legal systems of the Member States in the field of
`
`---------------------------------------------------
`
`
`
`
`41
`
`

`

`Case 1:19-cv-11586-FDS Document 220-4 Filed 08/11/21 Page 10 of 17
`
`105 Conclusion A-G Léger, July 10, 2001, C-309/99, Wouters, paragraphs 173-178.
`106 ECJ May 18, 1982, NJ 1983, 442
`
`
`
`
`42
`
`

`

`Case 1:19-cv-11586-FDS Document 220-4 Filed 08/11/21 Page 11 of 17
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` DDiitt iiss eeeenn aaddvvooccaaaatt
`
`
`Rapport van de Commissie ‘Wat is een advocaat?’
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Den Haag, oktober 2013
`
`
`
`
`
`
`1
`
`

`

`Case 1:19-cv-11586-FDS Document 220-4 Filed 08/11/21 Page 12 of 17
`
`
`
`Inhoudsopgave
`Voorwoord ....................................................................................................................................................................... 4
`2. Plan van aanpak ........................................................................................................................................................ 6
`2.1. Aanleiding .......................................................................................................................................................... 6
`2.2. Opdracht en op te leveren resultaat van de Commissie.................................................................. 6
`2.4. Perspectieven op de advocaat en zijn beroep ..................................................................................... 8
`3 De advocaat in historisch perspectief ............................................................................................................ 10
`3.1. Inleiding ........................................................................................................................................................... 10
`3.2 Vestiging van de professie (ca. 1500-1811)....................................................................................... 10
`3.3. Het ‘Napoleontische’ beroepsbeeld van de advocaat (1811-1879) ........................................ 12
`3.4. Emancipatie van het advocatenberoep (1879-1970) ................................................................... 12
`3.5 Modernisering in de twintigste eeuw (1970-heden) ..................................................................... 13
`3.6 Beroepsgeheim .............................................................................................................................................. 14
`3.7 Conclusie ........................................................................................................................................................... 15
`4 De advocaat in juridisch perspectief .............................................................................................................. 17
`4.1 De advocaat als rechtssubject .................................................................................................................. 17
`4.2. Ontbreken wettelijke definitiebepaling .............................................................................................. 17
`4.3 Formeel en materieel advocatenbegrip ............................................................................................... 17
`4.4 Hoedanigheid tegenover beroepsuitoefening ................................................................................... 19
`4.5 Shadow of the law ......................................................................................................................................... 20
`4.6 Beroepskenmerken: de privileges ......................................................................................................... 22
`4.7 Het domeinmonopolie ................................................................................................................................ 23
`4.8 De adviespraktijk .......................................................................................................................................... 24
`4.9 De adviserende advocaat en verschoningsrecht .............................................................................. 25
`4.10 De invloed van de tuchtrechtelijke beoordeling ............................................................................ 27
`4.11 Beroepsgeheim en de aard van het verschoningsrecht .............................................................. 28
`4.12 Integer gebruik van het beroepsgeheim ........................................................................................... 29
`4.13 Misbruik buiten strafbaarheid? ............................................................................................................ 33
`4.14 Conclusie ........................................................................................................................................................ 35
`5. De advocaat in economisch perspectief....................................................................................................... 37
`5.1. Schaalvergroting........................................................................................................................................... 37
`5.2. Advocaat als onderneming ....................................................................................................................... 37
`5.3. Een vrij beroep? ............................................................................................................................................ 38
`5.4. De werkgroep-Cohen .................................................................................................................................. 38
`5.5. Advocaat in dienstbetrekking ................................................................................................................. 39
`5.6. De taak en rol van de advocaat volgens de Europese rechtspraak ......................................... 41
`5.7. Nevenbetrekkingen van een advocaat ................................................................................................ 43
`5.8. De advocaat-belastingadviseur .............................................................................................................. 45
`5.9. Verhouding tussen praktijkuitoefening en nevenactiviteit ........................................................ 46
`5.10 Toepasselijkheid van het tuchtrecht op nevenactiviteiten ....................................................... 47
`5.11 Conclusies ................................................