In a recent decision of the Netherlands Supreme Court ( "Hoge Raad"), the question of which statute of limitation applies to the filing of a claim which was the subject of a nullified arbitration award was considered.  

The parties, all whom were either shareholders or directors of investment funds, had several claims against each other with respect to actions taken in connection  to those funds. After a prior settlement of an earlier court action, which did not resolve the parties' dispute in its entirety, the parties agreed on 25 June 1996 to submit the remaining dispute to arbitration. The arbitral tribunal rendered its award on 12 June 1997, awarding claimant the sum of NLG 1,971.971.57. In the setting aside procedure following the issuance of this award the District Court of Amsterdam set aside the arbitral award by judgment of 1 May 2002 on the grounds that the award violated fundamental principles of procedural law and thus constituted a violation of public order.

 On 22 August 2003 claimants again filed their claim before the court. The defendant stated that this claim was time barred. Claimants argued that was not the case, referring to the filing of the arbitration. It was claimant's view that the filing of the claims in arbitration interrupted the statutory time bar period.

The Supreme Court did not follow this argument. It stated in its judgment that filing a claim in arbitration does indeed interrupt the prescription of a claim, however, if the claim is granted by the arbitral tribunal, but the arbitral award is later set aside, the claimant has a six month time period in which to file a new claim. Failing such a filing, the claim will be time barred. Article 3:316 (2) of the Dutch Civil Code, stipulates that the prescription period for filing of claims before a court, is also applicable to arbitration.

Supreme Court 25 June 2010 (LJN: BM3914)