Twentse Damast vs Koninklijke Ten Cate, interim court proceedings for the lifting of the attachment of evidence (2014)

Attachment had been levied on one of our client's sales records for certain branded and other products (pursuant to Article 843a Netherlands Code of Civil Procedure). This information was intended to serve as evidence regarding a claim for the revocation of our client's trademark right. However, in order for attachment to be valid, a "claim in the main action" must be instituted sufficiently early for the court hearing the main action to assess the claim. No such claim had, however, been instituted in the main action, concerning a claim for access to the records. Surprisingly, the judge in interlocutory proceedings at Almelo district court considered that a claim for the revocation of a trademark right may serve as a claim in the main action for the furnishing of evidence pursuant to Article 843a Code of Civil Procedure.  (verdict (Dutch))