Track record

In the context of a larger construction dispute, Marco successfully represented the contractor in a dispute with its client. The Court of Appeal upheld the first-instance summary judgment ordering the client to transfer plots of land and holding that a contractual penalty had been forfeited.

Marco successfully represented the VvE in the proceedings on the merits before the district court and court of appeal in a dispute with the contractor it had engaged about defects in balcony gallery floor elements. Limitation of the claim also played a role. The case eventually reached the Supreme Court; the Hague Court of Appeal ruled in favour of the VvE, after which the case was referred to damages proceedings.

Onno successfully represented a minority shareholder in an inquiry procedure. The Enterprise Chamber ordered an inquiry and imposed immediate measures, including the appointment of an independent director.

In proceedings brought by Denise about liability for defects in a house purchase, the Midden-Nederland District Court held in an interim judgment that the buyer was given the opportunity to further substantiate what the expert engaged by the buyer meant by the possibility that a part of the house could fail. After the buyer had clarified this and the seller had contested it, the court held in a second interim judgment in 2024 that the defect impeded normal use of the home and that the seller was liable for the repair costs.

Together with Denise, Marco successfully held a home seller liable on behalf of the buyer for a defect that impeded normal use of the property. In assessing the damage, the court estimated the actual repair costs, taking into account depreciation (“new for old”). In this interim judgment, the court put questions to the seller.

Thomas won a case for a well-known auction house before the Leeuwarden Court of Appeal concerning extrajudicial avoidance of an auction purchase of two artworks by the famous British graffiti artist Banksy.

Rosa brought a claim on behalf of private clients against a contractor for various defects. The court held that several completion items had not been remedied, entitling the clients to have the work carried out by third parties.

For a longstanding client, a small construction company, Rosa lodged opposition. The contractor had been ordered by default to pay an outstanding invoice for foundation investigation. That judgment was successfully challenged: the contractor had never commissioned the investigation; it had been ordered by someone involved in the project who was not an employee of the contractor. The court also found that there was no apparent authority.

Onno successfully represented a director in several administrative proceedings concerning the unlawful deletion of his registration as foundation director.

Onno successfully represented a company in a dispute with a former co-shareholder/director who was held liable by the court for damages resulting from mismanagement.