First, it’s noteworthy that all cases pertained to some kind of contractual relationship between the parties. Most NCC cases involved the performance of contractual obligations. There were several cases where permission was sought for a debt-for-equity swap. There was only one case partially based on tort. Interestingly, most cases were summary proceedings, more particularly cases initiated by application. This is not what the founders of the NCC expected. They anticipated the cases to be main proceedings to be handled by a three-judge panel.
Also, all of the cases involved one or more parties residing in the Netherlands. This was to be expected, as jurisdiction is most easily based on the resident of the defendant. However, under rules of private international law it is not a requirement. A choice of court may be for a court in which neither party is domiciled.
Interestingly, most of the non-Dutch parties in NCC proceedings were from common law countries (the United States, the United Kingdom and Ireland). See the graphic below.
