What techniques are typically used by international counter-parties in our experience when attempting to gain the initiative during a dispute?

The most striking example of gaining a head start from the outset is the requirement to contract to the other party’s national law and to leave dispute resolution exclusively to the national court of the country of residence of the other party. By acting accordingly, the opposing party also immediately raises a blockade for direct representation of interests by the lawyer on the other side, since foreign lawyers are often not allowed to represent their client in the national courts abroad because of the legal monopoly of the native legal professionals. The lawyer on the other side will, therefore, have to be assisted by a native lawyer whom he cannot easily instruct due to a lack of knowledge of the indigenous procedural rules. Another disadvantage not to be underestimated is the foreign language that the lawyer from abroad often does not have or does not sufficiently control, making him powerless to properly represent the interests of his client abroad.

How important are civil procedural rules?

As indicated above, civil procedural rules are very important and not to be underestimated since they can put the foreign lawyer offside because of the aforementioned process monopoly of the native legal professionals. However, in the Netherlands, the District Court of Amsterdam accepts procedures taking place in the English language instead of Dutch. Dutch arbitrated tribunals often also cover proceedings in English. Apart from that, one of the first topics to decide upon is whether or not to raise an objection against the competence of the Court, depending on the interest of the client.