This chronology is not exhaustive.
– 13 March 2012 – Decision of the Cour de Cassation
– 14 September 2011 – Decision of the Ghent Court of Appeal.
– 13 September 2011 – Ghislain Londers resigns.
– 10 November 2010 – Beginning of the Fortisgate procedure before the Appeal Court in Ghent.
– October 2010 – Verougstraete, Schurmans, Blondeel and Salmon have been summoned to appear in court on 10 November 2010.
– 1 June 2010 – It is now public that the Public Prosecution has decided to investigate on possible violations of the confidentiality rule by the first judge of the country, Ghislain Londers.
– 19 – 23 April 2010 – Sometimes during this week, the investigating judge Heimans closes the investigations concerning a possible breach of the confidentiality rule.
– 19 February 2010 – The Cour de Cassation annuls the Fortis-judgment dd. 12 December 2008 for lack of motivation and refers the case to the Court of Appeal of Liège.
– 12 February 2010 – The Cour de Cassation examines the leave to appeal against the Fortis judgment.
– 6 & 7 February 2010 – Judge Salmon gives an extensive interview about Fortisgate to newspapers De Standaard and La Dernière Heure. The judge announces that, with her colleague judge Blondeel, she will appeal against the decision of the Cour de Cassation to charge them for faux en écriture (written forgery).
– 19 January 2010 – The Cour de Cassation (acting as a Chambre de mises en accusation, a control chamber prior to court judgment) decides to charge judge Salmon and judge Blondeel for faux en écriture (written forgery / falsification), yet to drop charges concerning stalking and concerning a possible breach by both judges of the confidentiality rule.
– 11 – 15 January 2010 – Sometimes during this week, judge Blondeel and judge Salmon have been house-searched.
– 30 December 2009 – According to De Tijd en L’Echo, the Public Prosecutor (at the level of the Cour de Cassation) recommends that the Fortis judgment be annulled. According to the Public Prosecutor, the judgment did not respond to the argument invoked by one of the parties (Société féderale de participation et d’investissement) that the governmental decision to sell the Fortis Bank to BNP Paribas served the public interest.
– 16 December 2009 – The High Council of Justice delivers its report on the functioning of the judiciary on the occasion of the Fortisgate saga (See Public Documents > nr. 10).
– 15/16 December 2009 – According to De Tijd, the Cour de Cassation has decided that the Juge d’instruction (investigating magistrate), Henri Heimans, is entitled not only to investigate whether a breach of the confidentiality rule has been committed by one of the judges sitting in the Fortis-case but also to investigate whether the Fortisgate judgment was politically biased, or not. This judgment brings clarity to Judge Heimans’ competences.
– 10 November 2009 – Judge Schurmans addresses a letter to the Public Prosecutor of the Court of Appeal in Brussels, and denounces that the criminal inquiry is biased since it only investigates one aspect of Fortisgate (breach of the confidentiality rule) without investigating other aspects of Fortisgate (possible influences on judges Salmon & Blondeel, and subsequent pressures on judge Schurmans). In this letter (See Public Documents > nr. 9) a large number of previously unpublished facts are made public.
– 23 September 2009 – Investigating officers go to the DEMINOR offices. DEMINOR is an independent company focusing on services to investors in listed and non-listed companies. DEMINOR and the lawyer Modrikamen started proceeding together in October 2008, their common goal was to have the sale from Fortis to BNP Paribas declare null.
– 18 September 2009 – Lawyer Mary addresses a letter to lawyer Rieder (See Public Documents > nr. 8).
– 16 September 2009 – Press releases state that lawyer Van Buggenhout and the President of the Cour de Cassation are charged for having breached professional confidentiality.
– 4 August 2009 – According to De Tijd and L’Echo, judge Schurmans has been charged for having breached professional confidentiality.
– 16 June 2009 – Judge Schurmans files an application at the European Court of Human Rights arguing that her rights to a fair hearing, to an effective remedy and to privacy have been violated by the Belgian state.
– 28 & 29 April 2009 – Again, the General Assembly of stakeholders is convened. A majority of stakeholders votes in favour of the sale of Fortis Bank to BNP Paribas.
– 15 March 2009 – Judge Schurmans’ lawyer, Hofströssler, addresses a letter to the Parliamentary Investigating Committee (See Public Documents > nr. 5).
– 13 March 2009 – Judge Van der Eecken addresses a letter to the President of the Parliamentary Investigating Committee (See Public Documents > nr. 5).
– 9 March 2009 – Judge Blondeel addresses a letter to all the members of the Parliamentary Investigating Committee (See Public Documents > nr. 5) and asks to be heard.
– 2 March 2009 – The Parliamentary Investigating Committee (examining a possible voilation of the principle of separation of powers) starts its hearing sessions (See Public Documents > nr. 5).
– 26 February 2009 – SFPI (Société fédérale de participation et d’investissement) asks for leave to appeal at the Cour de Cassation against the Fortis judgment (See Public Documents > nr. 4).
– 13 February 2009 – Judge Schurmans has been house-searched.
– 11 February 2009 – A General Assembly of the Fortis Holding is convened. A small majority of stakeholders refuse to accept the outcome of the latest negotiations.
– 28 January 2009 – Mr. Leclercq, the highest member of the Public Prosecution, addresses a letter to the First President of the Cour de Cassation, Ghislain Londers, in which he states that the latter has violated art. 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights (Right to a fair hearing) through his letter dated 19 December 2008 to the Parliament (See Public Documents > nr. 3).
– 24 January 2009 – Judge Schurmans addresses a letter to the Cour de Cassation (See Public Documents > nr. 3).
– 31 December 2008 – BNP Paribas asks for leave to appeal at the Cour de Cassation against the Fortis judgment (See Public Documents > nr. 4).
– 19 December 2008 – First President of the Cour de Cassation, Ghislain Londers, addresses a letter to the Parliament in which he states that there have been attempts by the Executive to influence the Judiciary. Subsequent demise of the Leterme-I government (See Public Documents > nr. 2).
– 17 December 2008 – Prime Minister Leterme addresses a letter to the Parliament relating to several contacts that have taken place before the Fortis judgment (See Public Documents > nr. 2).
– 12 December 2008 – The Fortis judgment is handed down by two judges Blondeel and Salmon of the Court of Appeal (See Public Documents > nr. 1). Contrary to the Brussels Commercial Tribunal, the Court of Appeal decides that the stakeholders should have been consulted before the Fortis Bank was sold to BNP Paribas. In the judgment, it is ordered that:
* The decisions taken by the Board of Directors in October 2008 be suspended;
* A General Assembly be convened before or on 12 February 2009;
* BNP Paribas maintain its acquisition of shares in Fortis Bank, the current state of affairs is thus ‘frozen’;
* BNP Paribas maintain its interbank relations and liquidity provisions with Fortis Bank, here too the current state of affairs is thus ‘frozen’ .
Following to this judgment, all interested parties involved resumed the negotiations.
– 18 November 2008 – The Brussels Commercial Tribunal decides that the stakeholders were not to be consulted before the Fortis Bank was sold to BNP Paribas.
– October 2008 – A number of stakeholders of the Fortis Bank files an application with the Brussels Commercial Tribunal (urgent proceedings). They request that the decisions of the Fortis Holding Board of Directors with regard to the sale from Fortis Bank to BNP Paribas be annuled (on the basis that their prior consent had not been given to the passing of the transactions).
– 4 & 5 October 2008 – The Fortis bank is nationalised and subsequently sold (for 75%) by “SFPI” to BNP Paribas.
– 28 September 2008 – Bank rescue plans set up by the governments of Belgium, The Netherlands & Luxemburg (without the prior consent of the stakeholders).