Brussels’ chamber of indictments is due to rule on Monday on who should stand trial before the Court of Appeal in the magistrates’ exam fraud case, in which the Brussels public prosecutor-general wants to prosecute four magistrates.
The High Council of Justice said on 3 March 2024 that there were indications that a council member had passed on the criminal law case study and marking guide for January’s competitive entrance exam for judicial trainees to one candidate in advance.
According to the investigation, C.B., an advocate-general at the Ghent Court of Appeal and a member of the exam board, gave the paper in advance to a trainee lawyer, the son of Bruges divisional prosecutor Y.S. and E.W., a judge at the Ypres division of the West Flanders Court of First Instance.
C.B. is also alleged to have shared information about the criminal law and contract law case studies with several other candidates, including a prosecution lawyer. The results of the exams concerned were subsequently annulled.
Humo reported that the suspected fraud came to light through the law firm of lawyer S.C., where the son of Y.S. and E.W. was completing his traineeship.
The young man had been given several weeks off to prepare for the exam, but S.C. allegedly discovered that he had secretly logged in from home to Kleos, a software system used to search earlier court rulings.
He is said to have searched for judgments on highly specific legal issues, suggesting he knew what kind of precedents would be relevant for the magistrates’ exam.
S.C. downloaded 14 documents from the office computer used by N.S., copied them to a USB stick and handed them to Bruges prosecutor Filiep Jodts, who then alerted the High Council of Justice.
The revelations led not only to the annulment of the exams concerned, but also to disciplinary and criminal investigations into the magistrates involved.
The disciplinary inquiry resulted in the dismissal of advocate-general C.B.; Bruges divisional prosecutor Y.S. and his wife E.W.; Ypres divisional prosecutor J.L.; and Bruges prosecution lawyer A.V.
J.L. was found to have shared exam information with his daughter, who was due to sit the test, while A.V. took part in the exam after receiving specific information about it from C.B.
Alongside the disciplinary case, a judicial investigation also continued. In that case, the Brussels public prosecutor-general wants to prosecute four magistrates: C.B., Y.S., J.L. and Ghent advocate-general J.E.
J.E. is suspected of passing on the criminal law exam case study to two prosecution lawyers who were sitting the exam.
The case first came before Brussels’ chamber of indictments in September 2025, but because the civil parties had not been summoned to that hearing, all parties had to be called again.
The chamber finally examined the file on 11 June, when one of the issues raised was whether it and the Court of Appeal still had jurisdiction.
Recent rulings by the Constitutional Court appear to suggest that the system of privileged jurisdiction, under which cases involving magistrates are dealt with directly by a court of appeal, may be unconstitutional.
The chamber’s decision is expected later on Monday.
In a separate development, N.S. filed a complaint in June 2024 with an investigating judge in Brussels against lawyer S.C. His parents, Y.S. and E.W., and advocate-general C.B. later joined that complaint.
That investigation has also now been completed, and on 21 April the Brussels pre-trial chamber decided to send S.C. to the criminal court on a hacking charge. It is not yet clear when that trial will take place.
