← Back to MCP use cases
builder20 min

Legislation Comparison Across Countries

Leverage Moonlit's multi-jurisdictional coverage to compare legal frameworks across countries. Claude can search legislation and case law from multiple jurisdictions simultaneously, identify how the same EU directive was transposed differently, or compare judicial approaches to the same legal question. Particularly useful for cross-border transactions, multi-jurisdictional compliance, and academic comparative law research.


MCP Setup Required

Make sure you've added Moonlit as an MCP server in Claude Desktop.

View setup instructions →

Try these prompts

Compare how Germany, France, and the Netherlands implemented the EU Directive on collective redress.
How do courts in different EU member states interpret 'legitimate interest' under GDPR Article 6(1)(f)?
Compare non-compete clause enforceability across Dutch, German, and Belgian employment law.
How do the Netherlands and Germany differ in their implementation of the EU Whistleblower Directive?
Compare the AI Act's national enforcement mechanisms being set up in the Netherlands, Germany, and France.

Example Conversation

You

Compare non-compete clause enforceability in Dutch, German, and Belgian employment law. I need this for a cross-border employment contract.

Claude

I'll search Moonlit for legislation and key case law on non-compete clauses across these three jurisdictions. **Comparative Analysis: Non-Compete Clauses in NL / DE / BE** **Netherlands** - **Statutory basis:** Article 7:653 of the Dutch Civil Code (Burgerlijk Wetboek) - **Formal requirements:** Must be agreed in writing with an employee aged 18+ - **Fixed-term contracts:** Since the 2015 WWZ reform, non-competes in fixed-term contracts are only valid if the employer demonstrates a "substantial business interest" (zwaarwichtig bedrijfsbelang) in writing. The Hoge Raad has held this requirement must be assessed strictly (ECLI:NL:HR:2022:1374). - **Maximum duration:** No statutory cap, but courts routinely limit excessively long clauses. The Gerechtshof Arnhem-Leeuwarden reduced a 24-month clause to 12 months in ECLI:NL:GHARL:2023:8712. - **Compensation:** No statutory requirement, but the absence of compensation is a factor in the judicial balancing test. - **Judicial moderation:** Courts can nullify or limit the clause if it unreasonably disadvantages the employee relative to the interest being protected (Article 7:653(3) BW). **Germany** - **Statutory basis:** Sections 74-75d of the German Commercial Code (Handelsgesetzbuch, HGB) - **Maximum duration:** Strictly capped at 2 years (Section 74a(1) HGB) - **Mandatory compensation (Karenzentschadigung):** The employer must pay at least 50% of the employee's last compensation for the duration of the restriction (Section 74(2) HGB). Without this commitment, the clause is void and the employee is not bound. - **Scope:** Must be limited to activities that compete with the employer's business. A clause that effectively prevents the employee from earning a living is void (BAG, judgment of 14 July 2021, 10 AZR 193/20). - **Waiver:** The employer can waive the non-compete with 12 months' notice, but remains liable for compensation for 12 months after waiver. **Belgium** - **Statutory basis:** Article 65 of the Employment Contracts Act (Arbeidsovereenkomstenwet) - **Salary threshold:** Only valid for employees earning above a salary threshold (currently approximately 39,353 EUR gross/year; above 78,706 EUR, the clause can cover broader activities) - **Maximum duration:** Strictly limited to 12 months - **Geographic scope:** Must be limited to a reasonable geographic area - **Mandatory compensation:** The employer must pay a lump-sum indemnity equal to at least 50% of gross salary for the restriction period, unless the employer waives the clause within 15 days of contract termination - **Type of termination:** The clause is void if the employer terminates without serious cause or the employee terminates for serious cause attributable to the employer | Aspect | Netherlands | Germany | Belgium | |--------|------------|---------|---------| | Max duration | No statutory max | 2 years | 12 months | | Compensation required | No (but affects enforceability) | Yes, min 50% salary | Yes, min 50% salary | | Fixed-term contracts | Restricted since 2015 | Allowed | Allowed above threshold | | Salary threshold | None | None | ~39,353 EUR | | Judicial discretion | High (can modify) | Moderate | Limited (void or valid) | **Practical recommendation:** For a cross-border employment contract covering all three countries, consider including a non-compete with a 12-month duration and 50% salary compensation. This satisfies the strictest requirements (Belgium) while being enforceable in all three jurisdictions.

Moonlit tools Claude uses

search_documents

Searches legislation and case law across multiple EU jurisdictions simultaneously, with filters for jurisdiction, document type, and field of law.

get_document

Retrieves full statutory text and court decisions to verify specific provisions and holdings.

list_jurisdictions

Lists available jurisdictions and their coverage to verify data availability before running comparisons.

Example Output

{
  "jurisdictions_compared": ["NL", "DE", "BE"],
  "results_per_jurisdiction": {
    "NL": { "legislation": 3, "case_law": 18 },
    "DE": { "legislation": 2, "case_law": 24 },
    "BE": { "legislation": 2, "case_law": 11 }
  },
  "key_sources": [
    "Article 7:653 Dutch Civil Code",
    "Sections 74-75d German Commercial Code (HGB)",
    "Article 65 Belgian Employment Contracts Act",
    "ECLI:NL:HR:2022:1374",
    "BAG 10 AZR 193/20"
  ],
  "total_results": 60
}

What's next