Petra Vos

Creating close working partnerships with her clients, Petra guides each of them through every stage of commercial litigation – her key area of expertise.

Petra’s practice covers a wide range of areas including all legal aspects of contractual disputes, liability and insurance law. Representing a broad spectrum of clients including those in railway, energy and telecommunications, she has provided successful solutions on many challenging litigation cases.

Furthermore, Petra has written several articles on civil procedural law.

Regarding her academic achievements, Petra has a master’s in law from Nijmegen University (1996) and a post-graduate in IT law (Grotius). 

  • Languages: Dutch, English
  • Admitted to the Amsterdam Bar: 1997


  • 17.02.2014 NL law
    Stibbe advises ProRail

    Experience -   Advising and representing ProRail, the owner and manager of the Dutch railway infrastructure, in several liability disputes related to train incidents, some of which are subject to litigation. These matters are often complex due to the involvement of multiple parties (including rail operators and authorities), the nature and size of the damage (e.g. damage to trains and infrastructure) and the industry's high level of regulation.    

    Read more

  • 17.02.2014 NL law
    Stibbe advises Funai

    Experience -   Stibbe represents Funai in a major post-M&A dispute with Philips. The dispute concerns the contemplated acquisition by Funai of Philips' Lifestyle Entertainment business, which transaction was terminated by Philips in October 2013.   

    Read more

  • 22.01.2013 NL law
    Stibbe advised Bombardier Transportation

    Experience -   Successfully defended the global train manufacturer Bombardier Transportation in a dispute with the Israeli insurance company Phoenix. The dispute related to two fire incidents that occurred in Israel in 2001,  involving trains supplied by Bombardier Transportation to the Israeli railway company. Phoenix, the railway company's insurer, claimed damages from Bombardier Transportation. Phoenix' claims were held unfounded and were therefore fully and finally dismissed by both the District Court and the Court of Appeal in The Hague, with a final decision of 22 January 2013.  

    Read more

Related news

17.05.2016 NL law
Right to disclosure of bookkeeping limited by purpose

Short Reads - In the event of bankruptcy, creditors are entitled to disclosure of the bookkeeping of the estate under certain conditions. In its decision dated 8 April 2016 (ECLI:NL:HR:2016:612), the Dutch Supreme Court ruled that this right is limited and depends on the purpose of the disclosure. Creditors are not entitled to disclosure if the purpose is to retrieve information to support their claim against a third party.

Read more

02.12.2015 NL law
Product liability under Directive 85/374: a potential defect, is a defect too

Short Reads - In its decision of 5 March 2015 (joined cases C-503/13 and C-504/13), in reply to preliminary questions of the German Bundesgerichtshof, the European Court of Justice (ECJ) clarified that under Directive 85/374 an implantable medical device can be considered defective for the mere reason that the product belongs to a group or series of products that has a potential risk of being defective. If the product belongs to that group or series of products, there is no need to establish that the individual product actually suffers from that defect as well.

Read more

25.04.2016 NL law
Failure to appeal a judgment by one of the debtors with joint and several liability has clear-cut consequences in external relationships with other parties but uncertainty prevails in internal relationships between the debtors themselves

Short Reads - On 18 December 2015 the Supreme Court decided (ECLI:NL:HR:2015:3637) that if debtors with joint and several liability are ordered to pay damages to a party in the first instance, the joint and several debtor that does not appeal the original decision cannot profit from a successful appeal brought by the other debtors with joint and several liability against that decision.

Read more

02.03.2016 NL law
Recognition of decisions of Member States: threshold public order exception too high?

Short Reads - Member States must recognise a decision by the courts of another Member State even if it is obviously contrary to EU law, unless the decision constitutes a manifest breach of a rule of law regarded as essential in the EU legal order. This is perhaps the unsatisfactory consequence of the decision of the European Court of Justice dated 16 July 2015 in the conflict between Diageo Brands and Simiramida.

Read more

Other specialists

Our website uses cookies: third party analytics cookies to best adapt our website to your needs & cookies to enable social media functionalities. For more information on the use of cookies, please check our Privacy and Cookie Policy. Please note that you can change your cookie opt-ins at any time via your browser settings.

Privacy and Cookie Policy