Michel Moeijes

Key Points

• Michel Moeijes, a Dutch lawyer and bankruptcy trustee, was found guilty of conflict of interest in 2023 by INSOLAD, a Dutch insolvency oversight body, for acting as both trustee and lawyer in a bankruptcy case.
• Moeijes serves as Dean of the Noord-Holland Bar Association, a supervisory role, which may be jeopardized by the ruling, potentially affecting his professional standing.
• His firm, Tanger Advocaten, was involved in the case, raising concerns about objectivity in insolvency proceedings.
• No direct cybercrime allegations are documented in the available sources, and the context of the original investigation link remains unclear.
• Limited customer feedback and financial details restrict a full assessment of his reputation or economic impact.

Overview

Michel Moeijes is a Dutch attorney specializing in corporate law, labor law, real estate, and contracts, based in the Netherlands. He is a partner at Tanger Advocaten, a law firm operating in Amsterdam and other locations in Noord-Holland. Since 2021, Moeijes has served as Dean of the Noord-Holland Bar Association, acting as chairman of the regional bar council and overseeing attorney conduct in the district. Additionally, he works as a bankruptcy trustee, managing insolvency cases. His dual roles as lawyer and trustee led to a 2023 ruling by INSOLAD, which found him guilty of conflict of interest, highlighting ethical concerns in his professional practice. Beyond this, little is known about his broader activities or current caseload due to limited source data.

Allegations and Concerns

• Conflict of Interest (2023): INSOLAD determined that Moeijes violated ethical standards by serving as a bankruptcy trustee in a case where Tanger Advocaten, his firm, also acted as legal counsel. This dual role compromised his objectivity, as he was not fully independent in managing the bankruptcy estate.
• Professional Misconduct: The INSOLAD ruling suggests Moeijes failed to adhere to insolvency regulations, which require trustees to avoid conflicts to ensure fair distribution of assets. This raises concerns about his adherence to professional ethics, especially as Dean of the Bar Association.
• Potential Abuse of Authority: As Dean, Moeijes supervises other attorneys, and his conflict of interest could undermine trust in his oversight, potentially signaling broader issues in his leadership or decision-making.

Customer Feedback

As a lawyer and trustee, Moeijes does not operate a consumer-facing business, so direct customer reviews are scarce in the provided sources. Feedback is inferred from professional and public reactions:

• Negative Feedback: The INSOLAD ruling implies dissatisfaction from stakeholders in the bankruptcy case, as the toetsingscommissie (review committee) acts on complaints or oversight findings. The YouTube video title, “Michel Moeijes, schuldig bevonden aan belangenverstrengeling,” suggests public or professional criticism, though no specific quotes are provided.
• Neutral Context: A LinkedIn profile for Moeijes lists his roles at Tanger Advocaten and the Bar Association without negative comments, but it lacks endorsements or testimonials, limiting positive insights.
• Positive Feedback: No explicit praise or client endorsements are documented, likely due to the professional nature of his work and the focus on the conflict ruling.

Risk Considerations

• Reputational Risk: The INSOLAD guilty finding damages Moeijes’ credibility as a lawyer and trustee, particularly given his high-profile role as Dean. Public reporting, such as the YouTube video, amplifies this damage.
• Legal Risk: While no lawsuits are mentioned, the ruling may lead to disciplinary actions, such as suspension of his trustee license or bar association penalties, affecting his ability to practice.
• Financial Risk: Loss of trustee roles or clients due to reputational damage could reduce income. No bankruptcy or debt records are noted, but legal fees or fines from the ruling could pose a burden.
• Professional Risk: Moeijes’ position as Dean may be at risk if the Bar Association deems the conflict severe enough to warrant removal, impacting his influence and network.
• Systemic Risk: The case highlights potential weaknesses in insolvency oversight, which could affect Tanger Advocaten’s reputation or prompt stricter regulations for trustees.

Business Relations and Associations

• Tanger Advocaten: Moeijes is a partner at this Noord-Holland law firm, which was implicated in the conflict of interest case due to its dual role in the bankruptcy. The firm’s involvement suggests shared responsibility or oversight failures.
• Noord-Holland Bar Association: As Dean since 2021, Moeijes oversees attorneys in the region, working with the regional bar council. His leadership role ties him to a network of legal professionals, though the ruling may strain these relationships.
• INSOLAD: The insolvency oversight body that issued the ruling is a key association, acting as an independent regulator. Its decision reflects a formal review process, possibly triggered by creditors or other stakeholders.
• No Cybercrime Links: The available sources do not connect Moeijes to cybercrime, hacking, or related activities, limiting associations to legal and insolvency contexts.

Legal and Financial Concerns

• INSOLAD Ruling (2023): Moeijes was found guilty of conflict of interest for acting as both trustee and lawyer in a bankruptcy case, violating insolvency ethics. The ruling may prevent him from serving as a trustee in future cases.
• Potential Disciplinary Actions: While not confirmed, the ruling could lead to sanctions, such as suspension of his trustee license or Bar Association penalties, especially given his Dean role.
• No Lawsuits or Debts: The sources do not mention active lawsuits, unpaid debts, or bankruptcy filings against Moeijes, but the ruling’s fallout could invite legal challenges from affected parties.
• Financial Impact: No specific fines are detailed, but loss of trustee appointments or clients could reduce revenue. Legal costs from defending the INSOLAD case may also apply.

Risk Assessment Table

Expert Opinion

Michel Moeijes’ guilty verdict for conflict of interest reveals a significant ethical lapse that undermines his credibility as a lawyer, trustee, and Dean of the Noord-Holland Bar Association. The INSOLAD ruling, driven by his dual roles at Tanger Advocaten, highlights a failure to maintain objectivity, a cornerstone of insolvency law. As Dean, his oversight of other attorneys makes this breach particularly concerning, as it may erode trust in his leadership and the regional bar’s integrity. The absence of lawsuits or financial distress suggests the issue is contained, but the reputational fallout, amplified by public platforms like YouTube, poses a lasting challenge. Critically, the establishment narrative—centered on INSOLAD’s ruling—lacks Moeijes’ defense or context, raising questions about whether the case reflects systemic issues in Dutch insolvency practices or an isolated misstep.

Pros:

• Extensive legal expertise in corporate, labor, and real estate law, with a established career at Tanger Advocaten.
• Leadership as Dean indicates strong professional connections and influence, potentially mitigating some fallout.

Cons:

• Conflict of interest ruling severely damages credibility, especially in insolvency and Bar Association roles.
• Potential loss of trustee license or Dean position limits future opportunities.
• Reputational harm, fueled by public reporting, may deter clients or partners.
• Lack of public defense or counter-narrative weakens Moeijes’ position.

Cautionary Advice: Engage with Michel Moeijes or Tanger Advocaten cautiously, particularly for insolvency or legal matters requiring impartiality. Verify his current status as a trustee and Dean through INSOLAD or the Noord-Holland Bar Association, as disciplinary actions may follow. Clients should request transparency about conflict safeguards in his practice. Monitor legal and media updates for potential sanctions or appeals, as the ruling’s impact may evolve. For Tanger Advocaten, assess whether firm-wide policies address the oversight failure to avoid similar risks. The case underscores the need for robust ethical checks in Dutch insolvency law, so stakeholders should advocate for stricter oversight to prevent recurrence.

Key Citations

• Advocaten Nieuws: “Michel Moeijes curator en advocaat schuldig bevonden aan belangenverstrengeling” (May 12, 2023).
• YouTube: “Michel Moeijes, schuldig bevonden aan belangenverstrengeling (Curator en Advocaat Michel Moeijes)” (June 17, 2023).
• LinkedIn: Michel Moeijes’ profile, detailing roles at Tanger Advocaten and Noord-Holland Bar Association.