Skip to content
Interest of JusticeThe Leeuwarden Files

The claimants' filings · On the timeline

Filing
20 Mar 2024

C/17/190788 · Interlocutory proceedings on jurisdiction

Claimants answer the jurisdiction challenge

Claimants (Van Kessel & Stassen)

Filed for the claimants · every defendant denies the claims; the court has not ruled

In 30 seconds

The claimants' reply to Gates's motion. They argue Dutch law, not the EU rules, applies, and that Dutch courts have jurisdiction because the harm happened in the Netherlands and the claims are linked.

Cheat sheet

  1. The claimants say the EU Brussels I-bis rules do not apply because Gates lives outside the EU.
  2. They invoke Article 7(1) — claims against several defendants can be heard together when efficiency justifies it.
  3. They also cite Article 6(e) — Dutch courts can hear tort claims where the harmful event happened in the Netherlands.
  4. As a fallback they cite Article 9(c), saying it would be unacceptable to make them sue abroad.
  5. They say Gates did not dispute their factual allegations, so these should be treated as established for this question.

Key passages · underlined

With regard to Gates, it is undisputed in the writ of summons that he is the principal private driving force within this group.
Why it matters The claimants' case for linking Gates to the other defendants rests on this alleged central role, which Gates denies.Page 3 · TheNetherlandsCase.com copy
The claimants in the main action had the dangerous Covid-19 injections administered in the Netherlands as a result of the alleged deliberate deception, and they are consequently suffering their loss in the Netherlands.
Why it matters Their argument that the alleged harm happened on Dutch soil, which can give a Dutch court jurisdiction.Page 4 · TheNetherlandsCase.com copy
In view of the foregoing, the Dutch court has exclusive international jurisdiction, and it is unacceptable to require the claimants in the main proceedings to submit their case to the judgement of a court in a foreign state.
Why it matters The claimants' bottom line — the case belongs in Leeuwarden, not in the US.Page 5 · TheNetherlandsCase.com copy

Every defendant denies the claims, and the court has not ruled on them. Allegations are the claimants' pleaded positions, quoted as theirs. This is analysis and commentary, not legal advice. Interest of Justice is not a party to the case.

Keep this library open

Free to read, for good. Not free for IoJ to host.

Every document here was gathered, translated and checked by hand, and the whole record stays online for history, whatever happens to other sites. Interest of Justice is reader-funded, with no corporate or pharmaceutical money. If this library helped you, help keep it open.

Keep it openFollow to the judgment