NETHERLANDS Law and Practice Contributed by: Eva Schothorst-Gransier, Claims Made Advocatuur
District Court of Rotterdam 28 June 2023, ECLI:NL:RBROT:2023:5214 – Biomet Metal- on-Metal Hip Implants Following the extensive report of the court- appointed experts, the court was of the opinion that the metal-on-metal hip implants could not be regarded as defective in the relevant (2004– 2009) period when they were considered to be “state of the art” . Liability was rejected. Supreme Court 16 July 2021, ECLI:NL:HR:2021:1172 – Long-stop Term Metal-on-Metal Hip Implant Metal-on-metal hip implants consist of various components, such as the ball, the stem, and the cup. These components can be put on the mar - ket at different dates. During surgery, they are put together to replace the patient’s original hip. When does the long-stop term of 10 years start for a hip implant? According to the Supreme Court, every component can be regarded as a separate product. The start of the long-stop term depends on when the particular component was put on the market. Court of Appeal Arnhem-Leeuwarden 15 June 2021, ECLI:NL:GHARL:2021:5818, Confirmed by the Supreme Court 11 November 2022, ECLI:NL:HR:2022:1602 – Seroxat As a minor in 2001, the claimant was prescribed the antidepressant Seroxat. Fifteen years later, they held the manufacturer liable for failing to properly warn them about the suicide risk linked to the drug. At the time, they used the medica - tion for five months and attempted suicide sev - eral times. Unlike the Midden-Nederland Court, the Court of Appeal rejected liability. According to the Court of Appeal, the manufacturer did comply with its duty of care in properly warn - ing users about this risk. Moreover, in terms of “conditio sine qua non” , a causal link between the damages and the use of the product or the
EUR1,000. The total damages awarded by the Court of Appeal were EUR1,628.68. District Court Noord-Holland, location Alkmaar 31 October 2024, ECLI:NL:RBNHO:2024:11205 – Deelgeschil Defective Bike In this deelgeschil, the court accepted the manu - facturer’s product liability for a defective bike. As a consequence, the manufacturer was ordered to pay the claimant’s costs of the deelgeschil, estimated at EUR8,222. ECLI:NL:RBMNE:2024:4591 – Breast Implants The court did not accept the manufacturer’s product liability for alleged defective (silicone) breast implants. The court did not see any rea - son for reversing the burden of proof regard - ing causality. The claimant also did not meet the threshold for rewarding an anxiety claim, with reference to Supreme Court 19 July 2019, ECLI:NL:HR:2019:1278 . District Court Midden-Nederland, location Almere 21 February 2024, District Court of Rotterdam 27 September 2023, ECLI:NL:RBROT:2023:8987 – PFAS In this judgement, the District Court of Rotterdam held manufacturer Chemours (a Dutch company previously known as DuPont) liable towards four Dutch Municipalities for environmental damage caused by PFAS from 1984 to 1998. This judge - ment could open the door for product liability claims from local residents against Chemours. In September 2023, around 3,600 people col - lectively filed a criminal complaint against Che - mours, and, in the meantime, the Public Pros - ecutor’s Office opened a criminal investigation against Chemours and its directors.
192 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook