This note concerns an arbitration under Dutch law between seventeen cargo claimants domiciled outside the Netherlands and two ship owners, one of whom was domiciled

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE, QUEEN’S BENCH DIVISION,TECHNOLOGY AND CONSTRUCTION COURT[2013] EWHC 3201 (TCC) Before : MR. JUSTICE EDWARDS-STUART Between: Doosan Babcock Limited as Claimant

THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE HAGUE, 11 December 2012, Case no. 200.079.897/01 “VOS SYMPATHY”Judges: M.M. Olthof, A.A. Rijperman and R. van der Vlist Dana

THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE, [2012] EWHC 3468 (Comm), December 5, 2012 “GREATSHIP DHRITI” Judge: MRS JUSTICE GLOSTER, DBE Greatship (India) Limited v Oceanografia SA

THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUITNo 12-30230March 1, 2013 “DEEPWATER HORIZON” Ranger Insurance Limited et al v BP et al The

The paper that can be downloaded by opening this page and clicking here contains a discussion of the judgement of the Amsterdam District Court of 1 June

Over the years some uncertainty has existed in the Netherlands concerning the construction of Article 3.1. and 3.4. of the Arrest Convention 1952, where it

In its judgement of February 1, 2008 regarding the NDS PROVIDER  the Supreme Court  of the Netherlands held that the purpose of the duty of

Dr Nick Margetson’s Phd Thesis “The system of liability of articles III and IV of the Hague [Visby] Rules” was reviewed by Professor D. Rhidian