A Belgian court has ruled that banks must immediately reimburse victims of phishing scams for their losses, a decision that could reshape how fraud cases are handled across the country.
The ruling was issued by a summary proceedings court in Antwerp and stems from a case involving an elderly couple who lost nearly €50,000 after being deceived by fraudsters posing as bank employees. The couple transferred the money to an account in Portugal after being manipulated by the scammers.
The bank refused to compensate the victims, arguing that they had personally authorized the transfers and had therefore acted negligently. However, the court rejected that position and ordered the bank to reimburse the money.
According to the ruling, a bank cannot withhold reimbursement solely because it believes a customer may have been grossly negligent. Instead, the institution must first return the money and then, if it believes negligence occurred, pursue separate legal action to recover the funds.
Legal experts described the decision as a potentially significant precedent for future phishing cases in Belgium. Lawyer Geert Lenssens, who commented on the case, said the ruling could alter the balance between banks and fraud victims in reimbursement disputes.
The judgment comes amid increasing scrutiny of how Belgian banks handle phishing complaints. Consumer Protection Minister Rob Beenders has repeatedly criticized financial institutions for refusing compensation in many fraud cases and argued that existing rules already require victims to be reimbursed promptly when unauthorized payments occur.
Beenders has also called on banks to introduce stronger anti-phishing measures, including improved fraud detection systems, faster intervention when suspicious transactions occur, and clearer reimbursement procedures for victims.
The Antwerp court’s decision aligns with a broader debate taking place across Europe. Earlier this year, an Advocate General at the Court of Justice of the European Union argued that banks should reimburse victims of unauthorized transactions first and address questions of negligence afterward. While that opinion is not legally binding, it supports the same principle applied in the Belgian case.
The ruling is not a final judgment on liability and remains a temporary measure issued in summary proceedings. However, legal observers say it could influence future disputes involving phishing victims seeking reimbursement from their banks.