Penalty payment order (last onder dwangsom): how enforcement works

If a Dutch authority finds that your company or property breaches a permit, a planning rule or an environmental standard, it will usually order you to end the breach before a set date, either on pain of a penalty payment or on the basis that it will do the work itself at your expense. You can challenge that order, but the deadlines are short, and an objection does not stop the penalty from accruing.

The first type is an order subject to a penalty payment (last onder dwangsom). The second is an order for administrative enforcement (last onder bestuursdwang). Both are remedial sanctions under the General Administrative Law Act (Algemene wet bestuursrecht, Awb). This article does not deal with civil penalties attached to a court injunction or with criminal fines collected by the CJIB.

What are the two remedial sanctions?

Both orders are designed to end a breach, not to punish you. A remedial sanction (herstelsanctie) aims to end a breach, undo it, prevent it from happening again or limit its consequences (Article 5:2 Awb).

The order subject to a penalty payment

Under Article 5:31d Awb, this is an order to remedy the breach in whole or in part, combined with an obligation to pay a sum of money if you do not comply in time. The authority does not act itself. It puts a price on continued non-compliance and leaves the choice to you.

The order for administrative enforcement

Under Article 5:21 Awb, this is an order to remedy the breach combined with the authority’s power to carry out the work itself if you do not. Typical examples are demolition, closure, removal of goods or clearing a site. The authority recovers the costs from you.

An authority that may use administrative enforcement may impose a penalty payment order instead (Article 5:32 Awb). It usually does, because that is cheaper. Enforcement in kind is kept for cases where the authority cannot wait or where money will not work. The authority may not use both orders against the same breach at the same time (Article 5:6 Awb).

How do the two orders compare?

How does an order differ from an administrative fine?

A fine punishes you for something you have already done; an order only asks you to put it right. You can therefore avoid a penalty payment completely by complying in time, but you cannot avoid a fine that way.

An administrative fine (bestuurlijke boete, Article 5:40 Awb) is an unconditional obligation to pay. Because it is punitive, it comes with safeguards borrowed from criminal law: no penalty without fault, a right to remain silent, proportionality and no double punishment.

A remedial sanction has none of these safeguards. Fault is irrelevant: you can receive a penalty payment order for a breach you did not intend or even know about. The only questions are whether there is a breach, whether you are an offender, and whether you are able to end the breach. Because the two sanctions serve different purposes, an authority may impose a fine and a remedial sanction for the same breach, and companies often receive both.

Must the authority enforce?

In principle, yes. Under the principle-based duty to enforce (beginselplicht tot handhaving), an authority that establishes a breach must generally act on it.

On 5 March 2025, the Administrative Jurisdiction Division of the Council of State (Afdeling bestuursrechtspraak van de Raad van State) reformulated its standard test (ECLI:NL:RVS:2025:678). Enforcement remains the starting point. The authority may only refrain from enforcement if the circumstances of the specific case carry so much weight that the general interest in enforcement must give way. The test is now expressly a proportionality test: is enforcement suitable, necessary and balanced? Enforcement still prevails in most cases, but a well-prepared addressee now has more to argue with.

A concrete prospect of legalisation

The classic exception is a concrete prospect that the situation will be legalised. This typically applies when you have applied for a permit and there is no reason to expect a refusal.

The threshold is high. An intention to apply is not enough, and neither is an application that clearly cannot succeed. If legalisation is realistic, file the application before you argue the point.

Disproportionality and other grounds

Enforcement may also be refused if it would be disproportionate, or would breach the principle of equal treatment or of legitimate expectations. A disproportionality argument tends to succeed where the breach is minor, has existed for a long time, harms nobody and is costly to remedy. It tends to fail where a third party suffers from the breach.

Who enforces, and on what legal basis?

The Awb provides the procedure, but the power to enforce comes from sector-specific legislation. For building, planning and environmental matters, that is the Environment and Planning Act (Omgevingswet).

Under Article 18.2 of the Environment and Planning Act, the enforcement task lies with the competent authority, usually the municipal executive (college van burgemeester en wethouders). Regional environmental agencies (omgevingsdiensten) often carry out the work. Article 125 of the Municipalities Act (Gemeentewet) is the basis of the municipal power to use administrative enforcement. Sector regulators, from the Netherlands Labour Authority to the Dutch Data Protection Authority, have their own enforcement powers under the same Awb rules.

How can a third party force the authority to act?

An interested party can submit an enforcement request (handhavingsverzoek), and the authority must then take a formal decision. Neighbours use it against building work, competitors against businesses without a permit, and tenants against landlords; if action is taken against you, the file often started with someone else’s letter.

How do you make an enforcement request?

Ask expressly for enforcement action; a complaint or report does not have to be answered with a decision. Describe the breach and the rule breached, explain why you are an interested party (Article 1:2 Awb), and attach dated evidence such as photographs and measurements.

How quickly must the authority decide?

Within a reasonable period, and in any case within eight weeks unless a statute provides otherwise (Article 4:13 Awb). The authority can only extend that period by notifying you properly.

A refusal to enforce is open to objection and appeal. Silence is also open to challenge. After you send a written notice of default, the authority may have to pay a statutory penalty for failing to decide in time (Article 4:17 Awb), and you can appeal against the failure to decide. That is why a formal request works better than a complaint: it puts the authority on a clock.

What happens before an order is imposed?

An order is almost never the first document you receive. The usual sequence is an inspection report, followed by a letter announcing the intended order and inviting your view (voornemen).

That invitation is not a courtesy: what you say becomes part of the file a court will later read.

An authority may also act before a breach has occurred. Article 5:7 Awb allows a remedial sanction as soon as there is a clear and imminent risk of a breach. The threshold is high: a specific statutory rule must be about to be breached with a likelihood bordering on certainty, shown by concrete acts rather than suspicion. Such preventive orders are common where a company has announced an activity for which it holds no permit.

What must the order contain?

The order must state the breach, the measures you must take and the period within which you must take them. Most successful challenges are based on defects in the content of the order.

In more detail, the order must:

• identify the breach, including the rule breached and the facts relied on;
• describe the remedial measures required (Articles 5:24 and 5:32a Awb) clearly enough for you to know what will satisfy the order; “end the breach” is often too vague where the breach can be ended in several ways;
• set a compliance period (begunstigingstermijn) during which you can comply without a sum falling due or the authority stepping in; the period must make compliance genuinely possible and be no longer than necessary;
• be sent to the offender and, for administrative enforcement, also to the users of the property and any party who asked for enforcement (Article 5:24 Awb);
• for administrative enforcement, state to what extent the costs will be charged to you (Article 5:25 Awb).

Behind these requirements lies a principle the courts take seriously: the addressee must actually be able to comply. If ending the breach requires a permit you do not have, land you do not control or the cooperation of a third party, the order is open to challenge.

Who can be the addressee of an order?

Only an offender (overtreder). On 31 May 2023 the Council of State narrowed that concept and aligned it with functional perpetration in criminal law (ECLI:NL:RVS:2023:2071).

Broadly, you are an offender if the conduct fell within your sphere of control and you accepted it, or failed to take the care reasonably expected of you.

• Tenant. The party that actually carries out the activity is normally an offender and the obvious addressee.
• Owner or landlord. Since 2023, an owner is no longer automatically an offender for what a tenant does; control and acceptance must be shown. An owner who takes no interest in how the premises are used remains at risk, however. Reasonable care means periodic checks, contractual restrictions on use and acting on warning signs.
• Director. A director can personally be an offender if the criteria are met. This matters because an order against a company without assets is worth little.
• Buyer. An order is in principle personal. In the physical environment, however, Article 18.4a of the Environment and Planning Act allows a remedial sanction to bind a legal successor, so an order can pass with the property. Before you buy, ask about enforcement correspondence, orders in force and unpaid sums; a clean permit search is not enough.

How does the penalty payment work?

If the compliance period expires and the breach continues, the penalty falls due automatically. No further decision, letter or discretion is needed.

Under Article 5:32b Awb, the authority sets the amount in one of three ways: a lump sum, an amount per unit of time during which the order is not complied with, or an amount per breach. It must also set a maximum above which no further sums fall due. The amounts must be reasonably proportionate to the seriousness of the interest harmed and to the intended effect of the order. Many municipalities publish standard amounts, and an unexplained departure from them is a ground for challenge.

Once a sum has fallen due, Article 5:33 Awb requires payment within six weeks. Companies regularly discover months later that a large sum accrued while they were talking to an inspector. Negotiations do not stop the clock. Only a decision that extends or suspends the compliance period does.

What is the collection decision?

Before demanding payment, the authority must take a collection decision (invorderingsbeschikking, Article 5:37 Awb). It must also take one if an interested party asks for it, and then decide within four weeks. This is how a neighbour who obtained the order keeps up the pressure.

The collection decision is itself open to objection and appeal. Article 5:39 Awb brings the disputes together: an objection or appeal against the order also covers the collection decision, to the extent you dispute it. Article 5:31c Awb does the same for administrative enforcement and the cost decision.

There is also a duty to collect. The authority may only refrain in special circumstances (Council of State, 13 June 2018, ECLI:NL:RVS:2018:1968). Financial hardship, or an argument that the amount is too high, will normally not be enough.

Can you still challenge the order at the collection stage?

Generally not. Once the order is final, its lawfulness is settled and cannot be reopened when the money is claimed.

The Council of State allows only a narrow exception, applied strictly: essentially where it is evident that there was no breach or that the addressee was not an offender (Council of State, 27 February 2019, ECLI:NL:RVS:2019:466). Challenge the order when you receive it, not when the invoice arrives. Note also that the power to collect lapses one year after the day on which the sum fell due (Article 5:35 Awb). That period is short, and authorities do sometimes miss it.

What happens with administrative enforcement and its costs?

If you do not comply with an order for administrative enforcement, the authority carries out the work itself and charges you for it. In urgent cases, where a decision cannot be awaited, it may act at once and issue the decision afterwards (Article 5:31 Awb).

The offender bears the costs, unless they cannot reasonably be charged to the offender in whole or in part (Article 5:25 Awb). Costs include preparation costs incurred after the compliance period expired. These remain payable even if you comply at the last moment.

The authority must set the amount within five years after carrying out the enforcement. It can then recover the costs through a writ of execution (dwangbevel) under Title 4.4 Awb, which can be enforced without first going to court.

How do you challenge an order?

You object within six weeks, and if the compliance period is short, you ask the court for interim relief at the same time. An objection alone does not stop the penalty from accruing.

The route is the standard one. You file an objection (bezwaar) with the authority within six weeks of being notified of the order. You can appeal against the decision on your objection to the district court within six weeks, and in most environmental matters you can then appeal further to the Council of State. The six-week period is strict. A late objection is declared inadmissible except in narrow circumstances.

Why you may need interim relief

An objection or appeal does not suspend the order. The compliance period keeps running and sums keep falling due.

The only step that actually halts enforcement is a request for interim relief (voorlopige voorziening) to the preliminary relief judge (voorzieningenrechter). You can file it once an objection or appeal is pending. The judge can suspend the order, extend the compliance period or suspend the collection decision, and urgent requests are heard quickly. If the period is short and you intend to challenge the order, prepare the request together with the objection, not afterwards.

Asking the authority to lift or suspend the order

Article 5:34 Awb offers two ways out without litigation. If compliance is wholly or partly impossible, permanently or temporarily, the authority may lift the order, suspend it or reduce the amount.

In addition, if the order has been in force for a year without any sum falling due, you may ask for it to be lifted. A refusal of either request is open to objection and appeal.

What should you check as the addressee of an order?

Respond to the announcement of the order carefully and record compliance as you go. Partial compliance is the most expensive trap: if you carry out most of the listed measures, the full sum still falls due.

• Correct factual errors in the inspection report in writing and propose a realistic compliance period with reasons.
• Check whether you are an offender under the 2023 test, and whether you can actually comply without a permit or a third party.
• Check that the measures are concrete and that the amounts and maximum are proportionate (Article 5:32b Awb).
• Diarise the six-week objection period and, if the compliance period is short, prepare interim relief at once.
• Keep dated photographs, invoices and completion statements, and notify the authority in writing when the work is done.
• If part of the order cannot be carried out, file a request under Article 5:34 Awb before the period expires.

What should you check as a party requesting enforcement?

Your request is an application under Article 1:3 Awb, so it must be precise to force a decision within eight weeks.

• Ask expressly for enforcement, not just for an investigation.
• Name the address, the conduct and the rule breached.
• Explain why you are an interested party under Article 1:2 Awb.
• Attach dated evidence and ask to be kept informed.
• Send a written notice of default if no decision follows within the deadline.
• Once the order is imposed, ask for a collection decision if sums are not collected (Article 5:37 Awb).

What can we do for you with an enforcement order?

We act as administrative law attorney for companies, property owners and neighbours.

• We draft your response to the announced order (voornemen) within the period the authority sets.
• We file the objection within six weeks and request interim relief from the preliminary relief judge.
• We ask the authority to extend the compliance period or lift the order under Article 5:34 Awb.
• We check the collection decision and whether the one-year limitation of Article 5:35 Awb has passed.
• We draft and file enforcement requests and the follow-up notice of default.
• We review enforcement files before you buy or lease a property.

Summary

• An order subject to a penalty payment and an order for administrative enforcement are remedial sanctions; fault is irrelevant.
• The authority must in principle enforce, unless enforcement would be disproportionate or legalisation is concretely in prospect.
• Penalties fall due automatically when the compliance period expires, and negotiations do not stop the clock.
• Object within six weeks and ask for interim relief if the period is short; a final order can hardly be challenged at the collection stage.
• Partial compliance counts as non-compliance, so document every step and notify the authority when the work is done.

Frequently asked questions