The Rome II Regulation not only governs the applicable law, but also procedural aspects such as burden of proof allocation and limitation periods in personal injury claims in Utrecht. Article 15 distinguishes this: substantive law (liability) follows Rome II, while procedural law (evidence) is governed by the law of the forum state, such as the District Court of Midden-Nederland in Utrecht.
Burden of Proof Allocation in Utrecht Context
The applicable substantive law determines who must provide the proof. Under Dutch law, often applied in claims before the Utrecht court, the presumption of fault lies with the tortfeasor; in contrast to French law, which requires a stronger statement from the victim. Utrecht personal injury lawyers frequently encounter this in bicycle accidents involving foreign tourists along the canals.
Limitation Periods for Utrecht Claims
Limitation periods fall under substantive law (Article 15), with significant variations per country: five years in Italy, three years in Germany. Exemption due to incapacity or force majeure depends on the specific legal system. In Utrecht cases with an international dimension, such as accidents on the A12 or during events like Utrecht Canal Pride, timely filing is crucial.
In the Diamond Services case (C-292/18), the Court of Justice confirmed that limitation is a substantive aspect. In mixed claims, the law applies per partial claim, which Utrecht lawyers must take into account in cross-border injury cases.
Practical example: A resident of Utrecht injured in a Greek traffic accident has only three years under Greek law to litigate. At the Utrecht District Court, double-checking deadlines and engaging local expertise is advised for optimal handling.