The principle of legitimate expectations means that an administrative body must in principle honour expectations it has created. It is one of the general principles of proper administration and arises above all where officials give assurances about permits, subsidies and enforcement.
Legal basis
The principle is not codified but follows from case law. In its ruling of 29 May 2019 concerning a roof extension in Amsterdam, the Administrative Jurisdiction Division set out a three-step test. First: is there a statement or conduct that can be understood as an assurance, judged from the perspective of a reasonable citizen? Next: can that assurance be attributed to the competent body, even where it came from an official without decision-making power? And finally: do the interests of the person concerned outweigh the general interest and the interests of third parties? Even where reliance was justified, the general interest may stand in the way of honouring it; a duty to compensate may then arise.
How it works in practice
The third step decides most cases. Where building plans conflict with the environment plan and affect neighbours’ interests, the general interest usually prevails. Anyone relying on the principle must be able to prove the assurance: an email, a note of a meeting or a letter. An oral statement at the counter is rarely enough.
Where it goes wrong
People rely on general information from a website or on a conversation in which no concrete assurance was given. A second error is failing to record what was said, and by whom. Third, it is forgotten that a claim can still fail at the third stage, leaving the question of compensation open.
Related terms
The principle sits alongside the principle of proportionality, connects to the policy rule and to compensation for lawful government action.
Were you given an assurance the authority now denies? Our administrative lawyers apply the three-step test.
