The five most beautiful legal blunders by companies that you know too

Five high-profile legal blunders by well-known companies, each with a clear lesson: bol.com booked over 750,000 euros to scammers after a whaling email and had to pay Brabantia after all; 3.6 million pieces of personal data were leaked at Allekabels.nl; Albert Heijn was not allowed to fire a cashier over two bottles of cola; Heineken had to lower rent; and the American chain Wendy's lost again to snack bar Wendy's in Goes. Together, they demonstrate how important security, proportionate sanctions, and brand protection are.

2021 was also eventful, and as with every year, several large, well-known companies made significant legal blunders. We highlight five slip-ups.

Bol.com transfers 750,000 euros after a whaling email

After an email written in broken Dutch (with snippets of English), bol.com, as requested, adjusted supplier Brabantia's account number and transferred over 750,000 euros to scammers. Following a lawsuit, bol.com was forced to pay Brabantia after all. Read more about how bol.com fell victim to whaling.

3.6 million personal data records leaked at Allekabels.nl

The largest data leak ever in the Netherlands occurred at the online store Allekabels.nl : the data of 3.6 million people, including more than one hundred thousand bank account numbers and many passwords. The reputational damage was enormous, and the Dutch Data Protection Authority (AP) launched an investigation. It demonstrates that a data leak can have legal consequences and hefty fines — a reason to ensure your security is in order.

No fire for the Albert Heijn cashier with two bottles of cola

Albert Heijn dismissed a cashier who had drunk two bottles of cola without paying, in violation of company rules, based on its zero-tolerance policy. However, the employee had worked there for six years without issues and had drunk the cola openly in the canteen, in front of two team leaders. According to the judge, she was negligent but without intent to steal; dismissal was too severe a sanction, and a warning sufficed. AH was ordered to reinstate her and pay six months of back pay.

Heineken must lower the rent

The owner of Café Dollars in Nijmegen filed a lawsuit against landlord Heineken: the premises were too small to remain open under the 1.5-meter social distancing rule, meaning he could not use them as stipulated in the lease. The judge followed this reasoning and ordered Heineken to pay a rent reduction.

Wendy's loses to a snack bar in Goes

The American fast-food chain Wendy's wants to enter the European market but has been clashing with the Wendy's snack bar in Goes for years. After an earlier defeat in 2017, the chain tried again, but the 's-Hertogenbosch Court of Appeal upheld the ruling: the Dutch snack bar uses the brand normally (on the facade, packaging, and receipts), so the trademark does not lapse and the chain cannot claim it. It shows how important timely trademark protection is — and that a small company can take on a multinational.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is whaling?

A form of CEO/invoice fraud in which scammers impersonate a supplier or executive and ask to change an account number. Bol.com fell victim to it and had to pay the supplier after all.

Can an employer dismiss an employee for a minor infraction?

Not without further ado. The sanction must be proportionate. In the cola case, the judge found dismissal too severe for a long period of employment without intent to steal; a warning sufficed.

Why did a snack bar beat fast food chain Wendy's?

Because the snack bar uses the brand normally and the brand therefore cannot lapse. Timely and consistent brand protection made the difference.

Avoid your own legal blunder

Security, proportionate sanctions, and trademark protection prevent costly mistakes. The legal experts at MKB Juristen help you get your affairs in order. View our expertise in corporate law or schedule an intake meeting .