Onder 1.2 Gerechtshof Den Haag 18 december 2015

As discussed with the parties during the hearing, in this interim judgment only a number of partial aspects will be reviewed, namely: (i) the renewed motion for the production of exhibits pursuant to art. 843(a) CCP by Milieudefensie et al.; (ii) the grounds of appeal contesting the (grounds stated for the) dismissal of its earlier motion to produce those documents; (iii) the defences put up by Shell against those claims and (iv) Shell’s grounds of appeal contesting the dismissal of a number of those defences by the court. The latter defences, which are also directed to the claims in the principal cases, concern the international jurisdiction of the Dutch court, the admissibility of Milieudefensie’s claim and the admissibility of Eric Dooh’s claim and his right of action. Another (procedural) issue submitted on appeal by Shell is the validity of the notices of appeal in case c. This issue will be discussed first, followed by a discussion of the other defences and finally the motion pursuant to art. 843(a) CCP. This judgment on appeal reviews the procedural issues raised by either party, therefore, but also relates to some aspects relevant to the principal cases.

$ curl -s https://bron.page/api/v1/blobs/de8feb9f0194be3387388a193625674a6efa5f71b1f8db026b54aca27981e24c | shasum -a 256