Winning does
not meangetting it back.

Not in full, and usually not close to it. The unsuccessful party pays a procedural indemnity, which is a lump sum fixed by royal decree according to the value of the dispute, within a basic amount and a range the court can depart from on a reasoned request. It is a contribution towards your costs rather than a reimbursement of them, so winning and still being out of pocket is a normal result. Anyone suggesting the other side will simply pay your bill is not describing the Belgian system.

You pay your own lawyer and, ordinarily, the other side's procedural indemnity as well. That combined exposure is the figure that should decide whether to start proceedings, and it is the one least often put in front of people before they commit. It gets explained here before anything is advised, because a decision to litigate taken without it is not really a decision.

Possibly, and it is asked at the first meeting rather than left for you to discover. Second-line legal aid exists for those who meet the conditions, and a lawyer should tell you about it at the outset. It costs nothing to establish whether you qualify, and finding out after you have paid privately for several months is the worst possible sequence.

No, and this surprises almost everyone. Where a legal expenses insurance policy applies, the insured person has the free choice of their lawyer and the insurer cannot impose one. It is worth checking whether you hold such a policy before instructing anyone privately, because people are regularly insured for precisely the dispute they are paying for out of their own pocket.

No, and nobody in this profession in Belgium may. An agreement providing solely for a share of the proceeds of a case is prohibited for lawyers, so a percentage arrangement is not something being withheld from you, it is something the rules forbid. What you will get instead is the basis of the fees explained before the practice is instructed, and an honest view of whether the matter is worth pursuing at all.

Often not, because of time limits. Limitation periods and procedural deadlines apply to claims and to steps in proceedings, and the expiry of one can extinguish a right regardless of how strong that right was. A matter that might be time-sensitive is worth raising early even if you are undecided about pursuing it. The first conversation costs you nothing and can establish whether a clock is running.