Mass Claims An international journal with a European focus 2023 nr. 2
  •  

Airbus and TikTok: developing contours of judicial assessment of funder influence and funder fees in Dutch collective actions

Pim Wissink1

Case Note: The Hague District court 20 September 2023, ECLI:NL:RBDHA:2023:14036 (Airbus) and Amsterdam District court 25 October 2023, ECLI:NL:RBAMS:2023:6694 (TikTok)

1. Introduction

This duo of cases presents notable decisions by lower courts pertaining to third-party funding of mass claims under the (amended) Dutch collective action regime (WAMCA). The decisions shed some welcome light on the courts' interpretations of admissibility requirements, in particular concerning the limits of a third-party funder's influence on the representative entity initiating collective proceedings. Moreover, the Amsterdam District Court has outlined a number of principles in TikTok for its assessment of funder success fees should a damages claim succeed on the merits. If these principles prove workable, they may serve as an example for other courts faced with the same task.

 

Commercial third-party litigation funding is currently the ...

U heeft op dit moment geen toegang tot de volledige inhoud van dit product. U kunt alleen de inleiding en hoofdstukindeling lezen.

Wanneer u volledige toegang wenst tot alle informatie kunt u zich abonneren of inloggen als abonnee.

Verder in dit artikel:

Case Note: The Hague District court 20 September 2023, ECLI:NL:RBDHA:2023:14036 (Airbus) and Amsterdam District court 25 October 2023, ECLI: NL:RBAMS:2023:6694 (TikTok)

1. Introduction

2. Limits of funder influence: a possible hit and a miss

2.1. The miss – Airbus

2.2. The possible hit – TikTok

3. Tentative principles for judicial assessment of funder success fees

4. Comment

Naar boven

Voetnoten

Voetnoten voor dit artikel zijn alleen beschikbaar wanneer u toegang heeft tot dit artikel.

Naar boven

Gerelateerde artikelen

Deel deze pagina:

Nog niet beoordeeld

Abonneren

Bijlage(n)

  • Bijlagen zijn alleen beschikbaar voor abonnees.

Artikel informatie

Type
Artikel
Auteurs
Pim Wissink1
Auteursvermelding
Ik ben auteur van dit artikel
Datum artikel
16 januari 2024
Uniek Den Hollander publicatienummer
UDH:MC/17966

Gerelateerde inhoud

Vrij gevonden op trefwoorden:

VEB v BP, financial loss, securities, case note, CJEU, third party funding, admissibility, TikTok, Airbus

Verder in 2023 nr.2

 Mass Torts and Mass Claims Litigation, Next Gen?

The UK and EU, among other countries, have been diligent and avid students of United States mass tort and mass claim litigation.  Papers abound on whether there are good American litigati...

 Collective Redress in Germany and the Transposition of the Representative Actions Directive

Germany is known to be hesitant and sometimes even reluctant when it comes to collective redress and has been somewhat late to the party. Is this also true when it comes to the transposition of the...

 Collective Redress in Slovenia:

Selected Topics and Related Opportunities For Improvement Although the Slovenian Collective Actions Act was adopted in 2017,[2] no collective action for damages pertaining to consumer rights has ye...

 Residue Funding:

Re-allocating Excess Funds to Fund New Class Actions   This article introduces and analyses residue funding, a funding method for class actions that allocates the possible residue awarded after win...

 Interview with Prof. Georg E. Kodek, the new President of the Austrian Supreme Court

        Ianika Tzankova (IT): Professor Kodek, or should I say Judge Kodek? The first time I came across your name and your profile was in 2002-2003 in the context of the fundamental review of the...

 Airbus and TikTok: developing contours of judicial assessment of funder influence and funder fees in Dutch collective actions

Case Note: The Hague District court 20 September 2023, ECLI:NL:RBDHA:2023:14036 (Airbus) and Amsterdam District court 25 October 2023, ECLI:NL:RBAMS:2023:6694 (TikTok) 1. Introduction This duo of ...

 R (on the application of PACCAR Inc) v Competition Appeal Tribunal

Case note: [2023] UKSC 28 On 26 July 2023, the UK Supreme Court ("UKSC") handed down its judgment in R (on the application of PACCAR Inc) v Competition Appeal Tribunal ("Paccar"). The case concerne...

 Country reports

England and Wales, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Scotland, Spain   England and Wales Anna Dannreuther  Case law R (on the application of PACCAR Inc) v Competition Appeal Tribunal ...