News
Chambers Europe 2018 rankings: again splendid results for BarentsKrans
Last month we published the stunning results that BarentsKrans achieved in the Chambers 2018 Global edition. Meanwhile, the Chambers Europe guide has also been published and we would, once again, like to share our Chambers feedback with you. Chambers and Partners publish their rankings annually while comparing 53 jurisdictions across Europe, from Greenland and the United Kingdom to
Read more ›
Chambers Global 2018 rankings: excellent results for BarentsKrans
Chambers Global 2018, the guide that provides a worldwide overview of international practice areas, has just been released. BarentsKrans received several honourable mentions. This year the most noticeable mention is the Corporate / M&A practice group’s first ranking within the Mid-Markets category. Like last year, the Intellectual Property team has been rewarded with a splendid
Read more ›
Pharma update: Indirect infringement of Swiss type claims is possible
In its judgment of 3 November 2017 in the case between Merck Sharp & Dohme (‘MSD’) and Teva, the Dutch Supreme Court ruled (ECLI:NL:HR:2017:2807) that indirect infringement of a ‘Swiss type’ second medical use patent claim is possible. In addition, the Supreme Court found that there is no difference in the scope of protection of second
Read more ›
Unbundling Act for energy companies doesn’t violate EU law
The Dutch Unbundling Act – also known as The Independent Grid Management Act – prevents electricity and gas network operators from being part of a corporate group that includes companies producing, supplying or trading in energy in the Netherlands. The Act obliges energy companies to split their network from their commercial activities. Energy companies Essent,
Read more ›
Dutch Supreme Court: State Lottery misled players over winning odds
The Dutch state lottery misled players between 2000 and 2008 by exaggerating the likelihood of winning, the Supreme Court ruled on 30 January 2015. The lottery should have warned players that it would use both sold and unsold tickets when making the draw. Consumers were misled, because the odds of winning were lower than they expected.
Read more ›
