On this page the timeline of the legal procedures of the longest running forgery case in history will be shown. Visit the other Law pages for more information on the individual procedures.
Sotheby’s and five other auction houses file criminal complaints against Cor van L. for attempted fraud
Van L. is arrested and his house raided. 31 works of art are confiscated
Van L. is released after four days of interrogation
The confiscated works are returned to Van L.
The Public Prosecutor’s Office drops the charges against Van L.
Renée Smithuis and Cees Hofsteenge start an article 12 procedure to have Van L. prosecuted
The Attorney-General advises the court to deny the article 12 complaint, based on a lack of sufficiency and weight of evidence
The Court of Appeal Amsterdam denies the article 12 complaint, based on a lack of sufficiency and weight of evidence
Johan Meijering sues Van L. for breach of contract and consequential damages. Central in this procedure 10 works sold by Van L. to Meijering
Meijering files criminal complaits for fraud, forgery and embezzlement against Van L.
Meijering puts lays attachment on the farm of Van L.
The Public Prosecutor’s Office decides not to prosecute Van L. Meijering files an article 12 procedure against this decision
The Procedure between Meijering and Van L. start with a calendar hearing
Appearance of parties, the parties are unable to settle
The Assen Court appoints C. Buijsert as independent expert witness
Buijsert send his preliminary findings to the parties in which he concludes that all 10 paintings are fake
Buijsert sends his final report, the conclusions are the same as in the preliminary report
The Court of Appeal Leeuwarden denies Meijering’s article 12 complaint, based on a lack of sufficiency and weight of evidence
The Assen Court orders the expert-witness to write an follow-up report to further elaborate on the reasoning behind his conlusions
The Assen Court discards the conclusions of the expert witness and decides that there is insufficient evidence for the inauthenticity of the 10 works. Meijerings appeals this decision
Meijering’s appeal is deamed admissible
Meijering files another criminal complaint against Van L. for fraud and forgery
Meijering sends the appeal-summons to Van L. The number of artworks in the procedure are reduced to five
The first hearing in the appeal-procedure takes place
The Court of Appeal Leeuwarden puts the burden of proof of the authenticity of the paintings on Meijering
The Court of Appeal Leeuwarden hears three witnesses
The Court of Appeal Leeuwarden hears another three witnesses
Atelier voor Restauratie & Research van Schilderijen (A.R.R.S) present their final report, which leads to the decision of the Court of Appeal to declare two paintings fake
The Court of Appeal Leeuwarden orders a settlement conference, the parties cannot come to an agreement
The Court of Appeal Leeuwarden partially grants Meijering’s appeal and declares two, namely Pic de Luc and Het Reitdiep, of the five works fake. The remainder of the procedure is sent back to the Assen Court
The Public Prosecutor’s Office decides not to prosecute Van L.
Final judgement Court of Appeal Leeuwarden. The Court of Appeal destroys the judgement of the Assen Court of 30 January 2008
The Assen Court orders a settlement conference
Meijering files an article 12 complaint to have Van L. prosecuted
The settlement conference takes place, but parties cannot reach an agreement
The Court of Appeal denies the article 12 complaint, as the statute of limitation of the criminal facts have passed
The Assen Court allows Meijering, by interlocutory, to substantiate his damages claim
The Assen Court dissolves the contract between Meijering and Van L. Furthermore, the court orders Van L. to pay € 40.000 in damages to Meijering. The remaining damages are to be determined in a separate damages proceeding
Van L. appeals the Assen Court verdict and demands a stay of execution
Van L. announces that he will appeal the final judgement of the Court of Appeal Leeuwarden on the basis of fraud (382 RV) in his substantiation for attachement
The summary judge of the Noord-Nederland Court allows Van L.’s demand for attachment on Pic de Luc and Het Reitdiep
Van L. starts a summary procedure to have the two paintings re-examined
The Noord-Nederland Court denies Van L.’s claim to have the paintings re-examined
Meijering summons Van L. for the damages-procedure
The Court of Appeal Leeuwarden denies Van L.’s appeal to have a stay of execution of the 19 November 2014 judgement. The Court of Appeal will hear the remainder of the appeal on 5 december 2017
Van L. releases the material analysis report done by the Dutch Forensic institute (d.d. 12-12-1992)
The Assen Court grants Meijering permission to put attachment on Van L.’s farm
Judgement in the damages proceeding is scheduled to be given
First Calendar-hearing in the appeal instigated by Van L. is scheduled
DISCLAIMER: All rights reserved. All content (texts, trademarks, illustrations, photos, graphics, files etc.) on this website are protected by copyright and other protective laws. The contents of this website are to be used only in accordance with Internet regulations. Without the explicit written permission of the website’s controller it is prohibited to integrate in whole, or in part, any of the protected contents published on these websites into other programs or other web sites or to use them by any other means. This website can contain elements that are protected by copyright and by other laws that are subject to the copyright or other rights of third parties and that are correspondingly protected for these third parties.
The website’s controller has carefully compiled the contents of this website in accordance with their current state of knowledge. Access to and use of this website, as well as web sites related or connected to this by links, are at the user’s own risk and responsibility. Damage and warranty claims arising from missing or incorrect data are excluded. The website’s controller bears no responsibility or liability for damage of any kind, also for indirect or consequential damages resulting from access to or use of this website or websites related or connected to this by links. The website can contain links (cross references) to websites that are run by third parties. The website’s controller takes no responsibility for the content of these other websites.