Van Hilten Advocaten & Mediators closes down as of November 1st

The partners of Van Hilten Advocaten & Mediators at Amsterdam and The Hague have by mutual agreement decided to end their collaboration.

Emma Kostense will continue her current practice at the law firm SmeetsGijbels in (1071 KP) Amsterdam at the Jacob Obrechtstraat 70 (see www.smeetsgijbels.com).

Willem de Vries will continue his current practice at the law firm ScheerSanders Advocaten in (2585 ED) The Hague at the Nassauplein 36 (see www.scheersanders.nl).

Margreet Ruijgrok, Monique Beijersbergen, Coen van den End, Sabrina De Jong en Zoë Vis will launch a new law firm named Silk Advocaten en Mediators. Silk Advocaten en Mediators will be located at the current address in (1075 HJ) Amsterdam at De Lairessestraat 129 and in (2596 AL) The Hague at the Zuid Hollandlaan 7 (Spaces) (see www.silkadvocaten.nl).

Edith van Ruitenbeek will discontinue her law practice and will focus on other professional activities.

Raya Oranje-Jorna will launch a law firm in (2514 AB) The Hague at the Koninginnegracht 19, named Raya Jorna Advocaat en Mediator (see www.rayajorna.nl).

Blog

Access to Education and other Children's Right

Access to Education and other Children's Right

When moving from one country to another, finding the right school – in terms of creating the best opportunities for obtaining the necessary diplomas to face the global future – used to be easier for British kids than for others.

This, due to the many British schools, or at least schools with a curriculum in English, across the globe that help prepare kids for a global career.

The question is whether Brexit will change things, for instance for the many British kids living in the Netherlands.

Landlocked

There are British parents, who have lived an expat life for many, many years, who fear that they or their children will be “landlocked” after Brexit – instead of being free to move, at least in the EU, to study and work as they were accustomed to. A group of British nationals living in the Netherlands has therefore made a legal bid in the Amsterdam court to retain their EU citizenship after Brexit, arguing that their rights cannot be removed under European law. They have asked the court to refer their case to the European court of Justice (ECJ), arguing that their rights as EU citizens are enshrined in article 20 of the Lisbon treaty.

The idea was that if the Dutch judge referred the case to the Luxembourg court, it would have implications for all Britons, based on a concern about what the loss of EU citizenship will mean for the million or so UK citizens who live, work and study in the EU.

Once an EU Citizen, Always an EU Citizen?
That’s the Question.

The British citizens who are bringing the case against the Dutch government argued that anyone who has UK citizenship before 29 March, 2019, should legally retain EU rights – including freedom of movement and the right of residence afterwards.

Their lawyer argued that the Lisbon treaty gave them the right to retain EU citizenship after Brexit because it stated, in article 20, that “citizenship of the EU shall be additional to and not replace national citizenship”.

Although the defendants, the Dutch state and the Municipality of Amsterdam primarily argued that the issue is a matter of politics and that there is no real dispute, the Dutch judge did, in fact, decide 7 February last, to refer the case to the ECJ to make a definitive interpretation of what this ‘additional’ citizenship means. In other words; whether the rights of EU-citizens could be the subject of a withdrawal agreement or whether they are acquired, non-negotiable, rights.

UNICEF

As a family lawyer with an international practice, I embrace the initiative of these British citizens, especially as every effort should be made to see to it that children’s rights aren’t diminished as a consequence of Brexit.

Luckily, also UNICEF has made a strong statement, saying that all negotiations and subsequent laws and policies regarding Brexit should be made with proper regard for children’s rights under the United Nations Convention of the Right of the Child (UNCRC), ratified by the UK in 1991.

That the case was referred to the ECJ is important, especially given the fact that times are changing, not only due to conflicts on other continents that have worldwide impact, but also because of the increasing number of elected presidents in so-called civilised democracies – also within the EU – who seem not only inclined to deny human rights and children’s rights, but even to jeopardize them for a bet.

Published on

This article is published on The Xpat Journal



Do you have a question or remark? Leave your message behind.

* Mandatory

more articles by this author: