An existing Dutch client of TEN Advocaten that has a factory in the Netherlands, ordered a machinery production line from a company in Germany. Soon after it was installed and began operation, the German company became aware that the production line was not functioning correctly and determined that the problem lay with one faulty component, manufactured by a third company in Belgium.

Acting on behalf of its client, TEN Advocaten sought to remedy the issue and secure damages from the German company and the Belgian supplier of the defective part. And to ensure the advice provided would take into account the provisions of the law in both countries, with its client’s approval, it began to work closely with its fellow TEN members, NJP Grotstollen in Germany and Lexetera in Belgium, well before negotiations got underway.

According to Egbert van Ewijk, the managing partner of TEN Advocaten, after around 12 months of negotiation between the parties without reaching a settlement, and a subsequent eight or nine-month period of waiting for the case to come to court in Germany, NJP Grotstollen then petitioned for a change of jurisdiction in order to sue the Belgian part manufacturer in the Netherlands.

While NJP Grotstollen has worked exclusively through TEN Advocaten on the case, Lexetera has advised the Dutch client directly about aspects of Belgian law that are pertinent to the matter, something van Ewijk felt very comfortable doing due to his long-standing personal and professional relationship with his counterpart in Antwerp, Martin Michel.

“Our client is very satisfied with the way things have been handled in all three countries,” van Ewijk confirms. “And I’m happy that I can truly say to all our clients ‘don’t worry’, I know my colleagues in TEN well and can guarantee they will do a good job.”