There are no specific Dutch rules on Third-Party Funding in international arbitration. Dutch law, thus, does not prohibit Third-Party Funding in international arbitration.
Furthermore, Dutch law does not forbid the assignment of a cause of action to a Third-Party Funder and there are no rules restricting maintenance and champerty like in England and Wales.
Below we will address the relevant facts and applicable rules with regard to Third-Party Funding in the Netherlands.
1.1. TPF Regime in the Netherlands
1.1.1. Is TPF commonly used in your Jurisdiction? If yes, since when (is it a new trend or a well-established practice)?
See answer to 1.1.2.
1.1.2. Please shortly describe the TPF market in your Jurisdiction. Is it dominated by local or international Funders, which type of Funders are active, which cases get typically funded? Is there any source on Funders (like the overview published by the German Bar)?
Reported Use of Third-Party Funding and Alternative Financing Options
There are no statistics or case law available yet that report on the use of Third-Party Funding in international arbitration. With regard to mass tort claims in domestic litigation, however, it is reported to be a growing field in the Netherlands.
Furthermore, in the Netherlands it is possible to obtain a legal expense insurance, both before-the-event insurance (“BTE”) and after-the-event-insurance (“ATE”), although ATE is not used as widely as BTE. The number of companies that take out a BTE is reported to be increasing in the Netherlands.