De journalistieke vrijheid van (publieke) omroepen en het EVRM: overheden mogen eisen stellen aan journalistieke integriteit

Recent is in Nederland de discussie opgelaaid over de (journalistieke) vrijheid van publieke omroepen. De Nederlandse Publieke Omroep (“NPO”) overweegt om Ongehoord Nederland een financiële sanctie op te leggen. Dit naar aanleiding van het oordeel van de Ombudsman van de NPO (“Ombudsman”) dat Ongehoord Nederland de Journalistieke Code van de NPO (“Journalistieke Code”) heeft geschonden. In deze blog gaan wij … Read more

Climate case Milieudefensie et al. – The Hague District Court orders Shell to reduce CO2 emissions

Climate case Milieudefensie et al. – The Hague District Court orders Shell to reduce CO2 emissions INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY On 26 May 2021, (ECLI:NL:RBDHA:2021:5339) the District Court of The Hague rendered its judgment in ‘the climate case of the century’. An alliance of associations and foundations, together with over 17,000 individual claimants, with Milieudefensie as their representative summoned Royal Dutch … Read more

Klimaatzaak Milieudefensie e.a. – rechtbank beveelt Shell te zorgen voor CO2-reductie

Klimaatzaak Milieudefensie e.a. – rechtbank beveelt Shell te zorgen voor CO2-reductie INLEIDING EN SAMENVATTING Op 26 mei 2021 (ECLI:NL:RBDHA:2021:5337) deed de rechtbank Den Haag uitspraak in ‘de klimaatzaak van de eeuw’. Een alliantie van belangenorganisaties en ruim 17.000 individuele eisers hebben, onder leiding van Milieudefensie, Royal Dutch Shell Plc gevestigd te Den Haag (“RDS”) gedagvaard en kort gezegd een reductie … Read more

Amsterdam District Court puts a halt to unlimited forum shopping

On 25 November 2020, the Amsterdam District Court (the “Court”) declined jurisdiction over all non-Dutch defendants (the “foreign defendants“) in proceedings for compensation of damage based partly on an infringement of Article 101 TFEU. The proceedings were initiated by four public utility companies from the Gulf States (“claimants“) against both Dutch and foreign defendants. The court rejected the claimants’ argument … Read more

Dutch State breached duty of care in providing information to victims and surviving relatives of plane crash

Earlier this year, the District Court in The Hague ruled that the Dutch State is liable vis-à-vis the victims and surviving relatives of a 1992 plane crash in Faro, Portugal. The State was found liable because it is responsible for the information provided by the Dutch Aviation Safety Board (a government agency) to the victims and surviving relatives. This information, … Read more

Claims assigned to a litigation vehicle: who needs to prove what?

Two recent decisions from the Amsterdam Court of Appeal have confirmed that litigation vehicles cannot come empty-handed to the court, and should provide documentation regarding the assignments of claims they submit. The Dutch legal system allows companies and individuals to assign their claims to a “litigation vehicle” or “claims vehicle” that bundles those claims into a single action. In its … Read more

ECJ answers preliminary questions on jurisdiction in cartel damage case

On 29 July 2019, the ECJ handed down a preliminary ruling concerning jurisdiction in follow-on damages proceedings in what is termed the trucks cartel. The court clarified that Article 7(2) Brussels I Regulation should be interpreted in such a way as to allow an indirect purchaser to sue an alleged infringer of Article 101 TFEU before the courts of the … Read more

Lifting attachments on assets of international organisations in another state – preliminary questions regarding jurisdiction and immunity

Are Dutch courts entitled to lift a prejudgment attachment levied against an international organisation on its assets in another state? On 22 February 2019, the Dutch Supreme Court submitted preliminary questions to the Court of Justice of the European Union concerning this issue (ECLI:NL:HR:2019:292). In essence, the preliminary questions ask whether courts in one state are entitled to rule on … Read more

Dutch Supreme Court elaborates on the validity of a settlement agreement that is contrary to mandatory law

On 6 January 2017, the Dutch Supreme Court delivered its decision (ECLI:NL:HR:2017:19) on the validity of a contract of settlement (vaststellingsovereenkomst) (article 7:900 et seq. of the Dutch Commercial Code (DCC) that is contrary to mandatory law, thereby explaining article 7:902 DCC. According to the Supreme Court, a settlement agreement that is in breach of mandatory law is only valid … Read more