Speaking slot

Wouter den Hollander spoke at symposium on the concept of the protective scope in tort law

Wouter den Hollander spoke at symposium on the concept of the protective scope in tort law

Wouter den Hollander spoke at symposium on the concept of the protective scope in tort law

04.11.2016 NL law

The Rotterdam Studygroup "Normatieve uitleg" invited Wouter den Hollander to speak at a symposium on the concept of the protective scope ('relativiteitsvereiste') in tort law.

In particular, Den Hollander discussed the ratio of this concept, on the basis of his recently defended PhD thesis. Why should liability for the violation of a statutory provision be made subject to the requirement that the violated provision aims to protect against the damage of the plaintiff, as the Dutch Civil Code prescribes?

The symposium was held on Friday 4 November 2016 and hosted by the Erasmus School of Law. Other speakers were Lukas van den Berge (Erasmus School of Law), Laura Di Bella (De Brauw Blackstone Westbroek), Lidy Wiggers-Rust (Arnhem Court of Appeal and College van Beroep voor het bedrijfsleven), Jan van Dunné (Erasmus School of Law), Ben Schueler (Utrecht University and Afdeling Bestuursrechtspraak van de Raad van State) and Edward Brans (Pels Rijcken & Droogleever Fortuijn).

View the slides of his presentation (only available in Dutch).

Team

Related news

03.05.2022 NL law
Bijdrage Tijdschrift voor Insolventierecht

Articles - Gertjan Boekraad schreef voor het Tijdschrift voor Insolventierecht een annotatie bij een arrest van de Hoge Raad over de vraag hoe in het faillissement van een bedrijf om te gaan met de vordering van de overheid die een milieuovertreding van dat bedrijf moet herstellen.  

Read more

23.02.2022 NL law
Courts take lenient approach to standing of ‘idealistic’ claim foundations under Dutch class action regime

Short Reads - 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. 

Read more