Skip to content

Richard de Haan

Partner

Amsterdam

de Haan Richard
Richard de Haan

Partner

Amsterdam

Richard specialises in dispute resolution with an emphasis on corporate and company law litigation, securities litigation and directors' and professional liability.

He has a wide range of experience in litigation related to public takeover bids and other corporate transactions, shareholder activism/battles and other corporate governance related litigation, particularly before the Enterprise Chamber in Amsterdam. Richard advises and represents both public (listed and non-listed) and private companies. His clients include KPN, De Persgroep, Mecom, ABN AMRO and Rabobank. He joined Allen & Overy in 2000 and has worked in our Amsterdam and New York offices. He publishes regularly and is a member of the Dutch Association for Corporate Litigation. He is praised by sources for his "market impact" and "consistent quality in litigation." (Chambers Global 2017 Dispute Resolution).

Office

Amsterdam

Allen & Overy LLP
Apollolaan 15
1077 AB Amsterdam

View office →

Qualifications

Professional

Admitted as advocaat, Netherlands, 2000

Listed in the register of legal practice areas of the Dutch Bar Association for Litigation.

Published work

  •  Annotation Court of Appeal Amsterdam Enterprise Chamber 4 June 2019, enquiry proceedings Gierkink, JOR 2020/29
  • Annotation Dutch Supreme Court 22 September 2017, professional liability accountants, JOR 2018/30
  • Annotation Dutch Supreme Court 31 March 2017, CRI c.s. / SNS c.s., JOR 2017/221
  • Annotation Dutch Supreme Court 2 December 2016, De Rooy cs / Staat der Nederlanden, JOR 2017/86
  • Annotation Court of Appeal Amsterdam 19 October 2016, Seaway Heavy Lifting, JOR 2017/63
  • Annotation Subdistrict Court Middne-Nederland 1 June 2016, St. Beleggersbelangen Sinano / Circle Investment Support Services B.V. , JOR 2016/225
  • Annotation Subdistrict Court Middne-Nederland 23 March 2016, St. Beleggersbelangen Sinano / Circle Investment Support Services B.V. , JOR 2016/224
  • Annotation to District Court Roermond 23 April 2015, MartinBerks Holding BV / Nijssen Beheer B.V., JOR 2016/1
  • Annotation to District Court Zeeland-W.Brabant 5 November 2014, Vilenzo International N.V., JOR 2015/94
  • Annotation to Dutch Supreme Court 4 April 2014, Cancun Holding II, JOR 2014/290. On director’s special duties of care in case of joint ventures
  • Annotation to Dutch Supreme Court 28 March 2014, VEB NCVB / Deloitte, JOR 2014/196. On the application of statutes of limitation in collective actions
  • Annotation to District Court Amsterdam 26 June 2013, VEB NCVB / Ahold, JOR 2013/299. On the application of statutes of limitation in collective actions
  • Contributor to book Litigation in the Netherlands, Dutch Business Law Series (2012), chapters on legal privilege and enquiry proceedings
  • Piercing the corporate veil, the Nacap en Delta Biovalue judgments, TOP 2012/7, p. 269-274
  • Annotation to Dutch Supreme Court 29 June 2012, Melfund / Wagram, JOR 2012/317. On calculation of damages in case of claims under warranties
  • Annotation to Dutch Supreme Court 17 December 2010 and District Court Haarlem 12 January 2011, Krämer c.s. / Krämer and Anova Food / X, JOR 2011/172. On calculation of damages in case of claims under warranties
  • Annotation to European Court of Justice 14 September 2010, Akzo Nobel / European Commission, JOR 2010/332. On the scope of attorney-client privilege in European competition law
  • Annotation to Dutch Supreme Court 26 November 2010, Silver Lining / Perstorp Waspik, JOR 2011/7. On choice of forum, the scope of section 22 sub (b) EEX Regulation and arbitration clauses
  • Annotation to Court of Appeal Amsterdam 17 February 2010, Hottinguer / Emba c.s., JOR 2010/152. On admissibility issues in enquiry proceedings
  • Annotation to Dutch Supreme Court 10 May 2009, Vereniging tot behoud van HES / Stichting HvA, JOR 2010/3. On legal merger and the possibilities for interested parties to annul a legal merger
  • Annotation to District Court of The Hague 30 December 2009, Oguru c.s. / Royal Dutch Shell c.s., JOR 2010/41. On international jurisdiction of Dutch courts to hear claims by a foreign claimant against a foreign subsidiary of a Dutch company
  • Annotation to Court of Appeal 's-Hertogenbosch 22 December 2009, Palm / Mares Beheer, JOR 2010/298. On the doctrine of identification, piercing the veil and director's liability
  • Annotation to Dutch Supreme Court 8 November 2007, Hearing Systems / Audilux, JOR 2008/9. On alternative jurisdiction of courts in disputes concerning the validity of decisions from organs of a company
  • Annotation to District Court 's Hertogenbosch 28 May 2008, Souverein / Lammers, JOR 2008/224. On claims under balance sheet warranties
  • Annotation to Court of Appeals Amsterdam 1 April 2008, Van Vliet Utrecht / Van Kasteren, JOR 2009/1 and District Court The Hague 9 July 2007, Zwanenberg Food Group / Milverco, JOR 2009/2. On the interpretation of share purchase agreements
  • Annotation to District Court Rotterdam,1 October 2008, De Rijke c.s. / Deutsche Post International, JOR 2009/98. On the interpretation of share purchase agreements and claims under balance sheet warranties
  • Annotation to European Court of Justice 2 October 2008, Hassett / South Eastern Health Board and Doherty, JOR 2009/123. On the scope of section 22 sub (b) EEX Regulation
  • Annotation to European Court of First Instance 25 October 2007, Akzo Nobel / European Commission, JOR 2007/293. On the scope of attorney-client privilege in European competition la

News & insights

Exterior of a modern high rise building

Publications: 24 JUNE 2020

The limits of without prejudice protection

The High Court has allowed disclosure of “without prejudice” communications in two recent cases: one involving threats to remove assets from the jurisdiction in order to frustrate enforcement of a…

Read more
Exterior of a modern high rise building

Publications: 24 JUNE 2020

Risk of prosecution by foreign regulator no excuse for defendant's failure to disclose in English litigation

The High Court rejected a defendant’s application to vary an order for standard disclosure, notwithstanding that such disclosure would have exposed the defendant to a breach of its regulator’s…

Read more
Exterior of a modern high rise building

Publications: 24 JUNE 2020

Court keen not to second-guess FCA and LSE in market manipulation dispute

The High Court recently rejected an application by Burford Capital Limited, an AIM-listed litigation funder, for Norwich Pharmacal relief. Burford sought to compel London Stock Exchange Group plc,…

Read more
Exterior of a modern high rise building

Publications: 24 JUNE 2020

Bank ordered to disclose internal compliance review files in mis-selling claim

Following market-wide internal regulatory reviews into the mis-selling of interest rate hedging products, a bank has been ordered to disclose its internal review file and other internal documents to…

Read more