NETHERLANDS Law and Practice Contributed by: Eva Schothorst-Gransier, Claims Made Advocatuur
District Court of Amsterdam 14 February 2024 and 1 May 2024 (ECLI:NL:RBAMS:2024:745 and 2479) – Allergan/breast implants On 12 December 2022, on behalf of thousands of women, the Foundation Bureau Clara Wich - mann issued a WAMCA class action against Allergan, an American medical device manufac - turer of breast implants. The women claim the breast implants to be defective, as a result of which they have suffered damages. On 14 Feb - ruary 2024, the Court of Amsterdam ruled that: • Bureau Clara Wichmann is admissible in its claim as a representative of the women who were implanted with the device in the Nether - lands; and • the WAMCA only applies to these women who have a device implanted that was put on the market after 15 November 2016. As a consequence, the case can proceed on its merits. On 1 May 2024, the Court provided the instructions for the process of opting in and opt - ing out. Moreover, parties were given a deadline of 14 August 2024 to reach an out-of-court set - tlement. Until now, this has been without result. A hearing is now planned for 23 September 2025. District Court of Midden-Nederland 8 January 2025 and 26 March 2025 (ECLI:NL:RBMNE:2025:10 and 1209) – Bayer/ Essure On 3 April 2023, a WAMCA class action was issued by the Foundation Essure Claims (and others) against medical device manufacturer Bayer. The case concerns permanently implant - ed birth control devices for women (female steri - lisation). On behalf of these women, who had such a device implanted in the Netherlands, the Foundation is holding Bayer liable for general
and special damages due to these allegedly defective products to which numerous women attribute various complaints. Preliminary issues were dealt with on 8 January 2025 in the interim judgment of the Court Midden-Nederland, Utre - cht. The Court ruled that: • it was (internationally) competent to rule on the collective claim against Bayer; • the WAMCA is (temporally) applicable; • the Foundation was admissible in its claim; and • Dutch law applies. In its judgment of 26 March 2025, the Court laid down the (practical) instructions for the process of opting in and opting out, which were largely in line with what the parties had agreed upon. 2.17 Summary of Significant Recent Product Liability Claims Please refer to 2.16 Existence of Class Actions, Representative Proceedings or Co-Ordinated Proceedings in Product Liability Claims , in addition to the following. District Court Amsterdam 23 January 2025, ECLI:NL:RBAMS:2025:634 – Deelgeschil Defective Scooter In this deelgeschil, the court accepted the importer’s product liability for a defective scoot - er. As a consequence, the manufacturer was ordered to pay the claimant’s deelgeschil costs, estimated at EUR18,467.80 (including VAT). Court of Appeal The Hague 14 January 2025, ECLI:NL:GHDHA:2025:12 – BMW on Fire BMW’s product liability was established in the first instance. In the appeal, parties debated the quantum of damages. The consumer claimed EUR14,920.24, of which EUR9,512 was for gen - eral damages. General damages were awarded
191 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook