NETHERLANDS Law and Practice Contributed by: Eva Schothorst-Gransier, Claims Made Advocatuur
Recoverable Costs These include fixed court fees, expert fees, costs for hearing witnesses, bailiff fees and disbursements, and fixed expenses for having the judgment executed, which are recoverable costs for the successful party. Attorneys’ fees will only be compensated according to a fixed liquidation schedule. In reality, these fees are much lower than the actual attorneys’ fees incurred. Deelgeschil A product defect can cause personal injury. In per - sonal injury cases, one could start a deelgeschil , in which the court is asked to rule a on a particular case issue, such as liability, causation or quantum. A con - dition for the admissibility of a deelgeschil is that the judgment assists parties in reaching an out-of-court settlement. Contrary to normal litigation, in a deelge- schil , the liable party will be ordered to pay the actual attorneys’ fees for the personal injury claimant. 2.15 Available Funding in Product Liability Claims No Cure, No Pay According to the Rules of Professional Conduct for lawyers ( de Gedragsregels voor advocaten ), law - yers are prohibited from making “no cure, no pay” arrangements. An exception is made for personal injury claims. This exception used to be based on a pilot scheme that ran from 2014, but it became law on 1 January 2026. No cure, no pay arrangements remain strictly regulated. Certain conditions need to be met, but notification to the Dean of the Bar where the lawyer practises is no longer required. Fixed or capped fees are permitted. Third-Party Funding Third-party litigation funding is allowed in both litiga - tion and arbitration proceedings. No statutory legisla - tion specifically regulates third-party litigation funding in the Netherlands. The European Collective Redress Directive 2020/1828 includes provisions regulating third-party litigation funding for collective actions on behalf of consumers. These are incorporated in the WAMCA (see 2.16 Existence of Class Actions, Rep- resentative Proceedings or Co-Ordinated Proceed- ings in Product Liability Claims ).
• the defect was due to compliance of the product with mandatory regulations issued by the public authorities; • the state of scientific and technical knowledge at the time the product was put on the market was not such that the existence of a defect could be discovered (“state-of-the-art defence”); and • in the case of a manufacturer of a component, that the defect is attributable to the design of the product in which that component has been fitted or to the instructions given by the manufacturer of the product. 2.13 The Impact of Regulatory Compliance on Prod - uct Liability Claims According to Article 6:186 of the DCC, a product is defective when it does not provide the safety which a person is entitled to expect, taking all circumstances into account, particularly in terms of: • its presentation; • the use that could reasonably be expected to be made of the product; and • the time when the product was put on the market. These circumstances are not exhaustive. Non-compli - ance with product safety requirements will be consid - ered when assessing a defect. Conversely, full compli - ance with safety requirements does not guarantee that a product is without defects. Under the new PLD, the product’s defectiveness shall be presumed in case the claimant demonstrates that the product does not comply with mandatory product safety requirements laid down in Union or national law, which are intended to protect against the risk of the damage suffered by the injured person. 2.14 Rules for Payment of Costs in Product Liability Claims Court Fees In the event of litigation, court fees are due by both parties. A fixed schedule applies, and the amount depends on the quantum of the claim. The minimum amount for companies is EUR735, and the maximum is EUR10,487.
220 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook