Short Reads

Stibbe Litigators participate in consultation draft bill to modernise the law of evidence

Stibbe Litigators participate in consultation draft bill to modernise

Stibbe Litigators participate in consultation draft bill to modernise the law of evidence

03.09.2018 NL law

Members of Stibbe’s Commercial Litigation practice group have participated in the public consultation of a draft bill to modernise and simplify the law of evidence in civil procedure.

An overview of the draft proposal was provided previously on this blog by Petra Vos and Daan Barbiers.

The main goal of the draft bill is to enhance truth seeking in civil procedure and to promote efficiency and effectiveness. To that effect, the draft bill proposes to extend the role of the court. When considering a claim or defence, the court is expected to introduce and investigate facts that were not brought forward by the parties, therefore extending the factual grounds in the proceedings. The draft bill also introduces a broad pre-trial information gathering duty for the parties, resembling pre-trial discovery in common law jurisdictions.

In their response to the draft bill, the members of the Commercial Litigation practice group have raised questions regarding these two elements. Establishing the truth and efficiency are both important aspects within civil procedure to arrive at a just and balanced outcome, but the draft bill overreaches itself. If the court uses its initiative to introduce new factual grounds in the proceedings, it inevitably participates in the debate between the parties. This undermines the independent role of the court. The proposed pre-trial information gathering obligation of the parties will increase costs and complicate the proceedings. This may impede access to justice.

The response is available here (in Dutch).

Team

Related news

11.09.2019 EU law
Legal trend: climate change litigation

Articles - Climate change cases can occur in many shapes and forms. One well-known example is the Urgenda case in which the The Hague Court condemned the Dutch government in 2015 for not taking adequate measures to combat the consequences of climate change. Three years later, the Court of Justice of The Hague  upheld this decision, and it is now pending before the Dutch Supreme Court. This case is expected to set a precedent for Belgium, i.a. Since both the Belgian climate case and the Urgenda case are in their final stages of proceedings, this blog provides you with an update on climate change litigation.

Read more

09.08.2019 NL law
Verifieerbare vorderingen, de stand van zaken na Credit Suisse/Jongepier q.q.

Articles - De afgelopen jaren heeft de Hoge Raad verschillende arresten gewezen over de invloed van het faillissement op wederkerige overeenkomsten, het fixatiebeginsel en de kwalificatie van vorderingen als boedelvordering, verifieerbare vordering of nietverifieerbare vordering. In het arrest van 23 maart 2018 (hierna: Credit Suisse/Jongepier q.q.) verduidelijkt de Hoge Raad ter beantwoording van enkele prejudiciële vragen wanneer vorderingen die voortvloeien uit een ten tijde van het faillissement reeds bestaande rechtsverhouding voor verificatie in aanmerking komen.

Read more

Our website uses functional cookies for the functioning of the website and analytic cookies that enable us to generate aggregated visitor data. We also use other cookies, such as third party tracking cookies - please indicate whether you agree to the use of these other cookies:

Privacy – en cookieverklaring