CDC/Kemira: Amsterdam Court of appeal applies European principle of effectiveness to limitation periods

On 4 February 2020 the Amsterdam Court of Appel rendered judgment in a cartel damages action filed by claim vehicle CDC against Kemira Chemicals Oy (Kemira), a producer of sodium chlorate. The Court of Appeal disagrees with the Amsterdam District Court’s judgment of 10 May 2017 on issues of statutory limitation (see our June 2016 newsletter) and considers that CDC’s … Read more

Den Bosch Court of Appeal revives damages claims in Dutch prestressing steel litigation

In its ruling, the Court of Appeal confirms that the rules of the law applicable to Deutsche Bahn’s damages claims – here: German law – determine the relevant limitation periods as well as the interruption and the suspension thereof. Under German law, a ‘long-stop’ limitation period of ten years and a ‘short-stop’ period of three years apply. On appeal, the … Read more

Dutch court rules that investors suffer investment loss in the market where securities are listed and traded

On 29 January 2020, the Rotterdam District Court ruled on the question of which laws are applicable to the tort claims brought by (former) Petrobras investors against Petrobras (ECLI:NL:RBROT:2020:614). The Court applied the main rule of EU Regulation Rome II (the “Rome II Regulation”), which stipulates that the law applicable to claims in tort is the law of the country … Read more

Dutch court: insufficient substantiation? No follow-on cartel damages action

Dutch courts are forcing claimants (including claims vehicles) to be well-prepared before initiating follow-on actions. The Amsterdam District Court in the Dutch trucks cartel follow-on proceedings recently ruled that claimants – specifically CDC, STCC, Chapelton, K&D c.s. and STEF c.s. – had insufficiently substantiated their claims. These claimants now have until 18 September 2019 to provide sufficient facts regarding transactions that … Read more

European Parliament votes in favour of representative actions for the protection of collective interests of consumers

On 26 March 2019 the European Parliament approved an amended version of the European Commission’s proposal for a Directive on representative actions for the protection of collective interests of consumers, following a debate on 25 March 2019. The Directive will become law once the Council and the European Parliament reach an agreement on the European Commission’s proposal. The Council has … Read more

Amended governance rules addressing third party funding for collective claim organizations

On 4 March 2019, an amended version of the Dutch “Claimcode” was published. The Claimcode is an instrument of self-regulation, created by parties who are active on the claims market. Like the 2011 original, the 2019 Claimcode contains guidelines for the governance of organizations that pursue collective claims and settlements, aiming to ensure that claim organizations put the interests of … Read more

Legislative proposal on mass damages claims approved by the Dutch Senate

On 19 March 2019, the Dutch Senate approved the legislative proposal that introduces collective actions for damages under article 3:305a of the Dutch Civil Code (DCC). As the legislative proposal did not give rise to any debate in the Senate, it was passed without a vote. The legislative proposal will have a significant impact on the litigation climate in the … Read more

European Court of Justice issues landmark ruling on parental liability

On 14 March the European Court of Justice issued a landmark judgment in the Skanska case. In this ruling, the Court of Justice held that parent companies can be held liable for the damage caused by a competition infringement committed by their subsidiary if the parent company (that holds all the shares in the subsidiary) has dissolved the subsidiary but continued … Read more

Interruption of statutory limitation by way of written notice: a matter of interpretation

In judgment of 18 September 2015, ECLI:NL:HR:2015:2741, the Dutch Supreme Court reversed a decision of the Amsterdam Court of Appeal, in which it was held that a letter by US counsel for the claimant to US counsel for the defendant did not contain an “unequivocal reservation of rights” and therefore did not interrupt the Dutch statute of limitation. According to … Read more