A right of usufruct on a claim cannot be used to appropriate what is received through collection of that claim, as the Dutch Supreme Court ruled in its decision of 30 September 2022 (ECLI:NL:HR:2022:1331), in a case between KPN and Telecom Vastgoed about an alleged right of usufruct on rent payments. Background: telephone antennas KPN is a provider of mobile … Read more
Lawyers occasionally wonder how the law ended up as it is. We had that experience after the Dutch Supreme Court’s decision of 1 July 2022 (Rabobank/Ten Berge q.q.; ECLI:NL:HR:2022:984), regarding the possibility or impossibility of pledging a claim. The Supreme Court decided that claims that have been made non-transferable under property law in a contractual agreement between a creditor and … Read more
Recent case law on the standing of ‘idealistic’ claim foundations shows courts’ lenient approach. Under the class action regime that entered into force in January 2020, claim foundations face stricter admissibility requirements as a counterbalance to their newly gained power to institute an opt-out damages claim. The legislator however also implemented an exemption to the requirements for ‘idealistic’ claim foundations, … Read more
Since 9 January 2022, the public type of the Dutch Scheme is automatically recognized in the EU under the European Insolvency Regulation. This will be further discussed in this blog. Last year saw the introduction of the Dutch Scheme (we refer to our previous blogs for further details on the Dutch Scheme). The Dutch Scheme provides for two types of … Read more
“Bol.com mistakes scammers for Brabantia and pays €750,000’’ read headlines in The Netherlands in May 2021. After receiving an e-mail written in flawed Dutch (with some English in between), Bol.com paid €750,493.09 to what it thought was a new bank account in Spain of an existing Dutch/Belgian supplier, Brabantia. The court ruled that Bol.com could not rely on the fact … Read more
Introduction In Dutch commercial legal practice, intermediaries (authorized persons) frequently conclude agreements with a third party in the name of the principal. In doing so, agreements are concluded between the third party and the principal: the intermediary is not bound (article 3:66 (1) DCC). This is called authorized representation of the principal. If an intermediary exceeds his authority or acts … Read more
On 28 June 2021, the Minister of Justice presented a draft temporary bill on transparency of expedited liquidations (de tijdelijke wet transparantie turboliquidatie). As a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, the Minister expects that there will be an increase in the number of businesses that will need to be liquidated. Under Dutch law, the most efficient way to do this … Read more
Introduction As long as a contract has not yet been concluded, the parties’ freedom of contract is paramount. In principle, the parties are free to decide whether to continue or break off negotiations. Nevertheless, circumstances may arise under which breaking off negotiations is unacceptable. One of the remedies available to the injured party in such a case is to seek … Read more
Introduction In Dutch commercial legal practice, contracting parties frequently act as representatives of a company. Generally, this representation is unproblematic, but intermediaries sometimes exceed their authority or act as representatives without the required authorization. The general principle in Dutch law is that unauthorized representatives cannot bind parties. However, this can vary under certain circumstances. Legal proceedings on the merits of … Read more
Introduction Under Dutch law, a general principle is that contracting parties conclude agreements in their own name, i.e. they conclude agreements for themselves. However, in Dutch commercial legal practice, contracting parties frequently act as representatives of a company. In the latter situation, confusion often arises as to whether a party has acted in his/her own name, or alternatively in his/her … Read more