Debt collection lawyer in the Netherlands

Q: Can I file a bankruptcy petition to collect a disputed debt from a Dutch company?

No. The Dutch Supreme Court has held that the bankruptcy petition procedure cannot be used as a collection tool for contested claims. The bankruptcy route is appropriate only for clearly undisputed claims where the debtor's broader payment behaviour also suggests it has ceased paying its debts generally.

MAAK Advocaten acts for international businesses collecting commercial debts from Dutch counterparties. Our debt collection practice focuses on B2B claims: unpaid invoices, breaches of payment terms under supply, distribution and service contracts, and amounts due under settlement agreements. The Dutch legal framework offers creditors unusually effective tools for commercial debt recovery, and for many foreign clients a Dutch lawyer is the fastest route from an unpaid invoice to a collected payment.

Commercial debt collection in the Netherlands runs through a predictable sequence: statutory interest and recovery costs apply automatically from the moment of default, a formal demand letter triggers further consequences, and enforcement tools (including pre-judgment attachment, summary proceedings, and in narrow circumstances a bankruptcy petition) deliver fast results when negotiation does not work. The combination of legal pressure and procedural speed usually produces payment before any matter reaches a full trial.

This page explains how commercial debt collection works under Dutch law, what the creditor is entitled to in addition to the principal amount, and how MAAK Advocaten approaches collection matters for international clients.

Statutory commercial interest under Dutch law

For B2B transactions, Dutch law automatically applies the statutory commercial interest regime and a minimum recovery cost allowance once a payment is overdue. These entitlements arise by operation of law, do not need to be agreed in the contract, and cannot be meaningfully reduced to the creditor's detriment.

The Dutch implementation of the EU Late Payment Directive (Directive 2011/7/EU) is found in articles 6:119a and 6:119b of the Dutch Civil Code. For commercial transactions between businesses, the statutory commercial interest is calculated by reference to the European Central Bank's main refinancing operation rate plus a statutory margin, with the combined rate published twice a year by the Dutch Ministry of Finance. In addition to interest, article 6:96(4) of the Dutch Civil Code, read with the Besluit vergoeding voor buitengerechtelijke incassokosten (WIK), entitles the creditor to fixed recovery costs starting at 40 euro for each unpaid invoice, with higher amounts for larger claims on a sliding scale.

The statutory regime has three practical consequences for creditors. First, the meter is running from the moment of default, regardless of whether a demand has been sent, so time does not favour the debtor. Second, the recovery cost allowance applies automatically once the debtor is in default and has had a fourteen-day grace period after a proper demand for consumer transactions (the rules for B2B are slightly more lenient for the creditor). Third, the entitlements cumulate: interest plus recovery costs plus any contractually agreed additional amounts, all on top of the principal invoice.

In practice, calculating the exact interest and recovery costs on a claim can be non-trivial, because the statutory rate has changed several times since 1992, partial payments are allocated under article 6:44 of the Dutch Civil Code, and compound interest applies under article 6:119(2). To make this work easier for creditors and their advisors, the Dutch Law Institute statutory interest calculator automatically computes ordinary statutory interest (article 6:119), statutory commercial interest (article 6:119a), extrajudicial collection costs under article 6:96 and the WIK, and generates a full payment schedule with the correct allocation of partial payments. The calculator was developed by a team at the Dutch Law Institute and Remko Roosjen, litigation attorney and partner at MAAK Advocaten, contributed to the project as one of the legal specialists behind the methodology. We use it ourselves on live debt collection files, and international creditors are welcome to do the same.

Pre-action steps under Dutch law

In a typical commercial debt collection matter, the first legal step is a demand letter (aanmaning or ingebrekestelling) that formally puts the debtor in default, confirms the amount owed, calculates the interest and recovery costs, and grants a short period for payment before further action is taken. A properly drafted demand letter does much of the work on its own.

The demand letter is not a formality. It should specify the principal amount, the underlying invoices, the statutory interest calculation, the applicable recovery cost, any contractual interest or penalty entitlements, a reasonable payment deadline (typically seven to fourteen days for a B2B matter), and a clear statement that enforcement steps (including pre-judgment attachment and court proceedings) will follow if payment does not arrive within the deadline. For foreign creditors, the fact that the letter comes from a Dutch lawyer signals seriousness in a way that further changes the commercial dynamic.

Most collectible commercial debts pay at the demand letter stage, because the combination of a formal Dutch lawyer letter, a clear calculation of all amounts due, and a credible threat of attachment is usually enough to move a solvent debtor to pay rather than to litigate. For the matters that do not pay at this stage, the next step is almost always a pre-judgment attachment combined with summary proceedings.

Pre-judgment attachment (conservatoir beslag)

Pre-judgment attachment (conservatoir beslag) is the single most effective tool in Dutch commercial debt collection. It allows a creditor to freeze a debtor's Dutch assets on short notice, without prior warning, on the basis of a relatively light threshold of plausibility.

The procedure is set out in articles 700 and following of the Dutch Code of Civil Procedure. The creditor files a request (verzoekschrift) with the voorzieningenrechter, setting out the underlying claim and the grounds for attachment. The request is usually decided within one to three working days, and the decision is made ex parte, meaning that the debtor is not heard before the attachment order is granted. Once granted, the order authorises a bailiff to serve the attachment on specific assets: bank accounts with Dutch banks, receivables owed by third parties to the debtor, real property, inventory, vehicles, or shares in Dutch companies.

The attachment freezes the assets in place. The debtor cannot dispose of them, bank accounts are blocked to the extent of the attached amount, and receivables from third parties are redirected. Within a short period after the attachment (usually fourteen days), the creditor must initiate substantive proceedings (normal court proceedings or summary proceedings) to validate the attachment, failing which the attachment lapses.

In practice, conservatoir beslag produces payment in a large proportion of collectible commercial debt cases, because it immediately affects the debtor's liquidity and reputation. A creditor with an attached bank account has strong leverage to negotiate a settlement, and many debtors prefer to pay rather than let the attachment and the subsequent substantive proceedings run their course.

Summary proceedings for undisputed claims in the Netherlands

For commercial debts that are clearly due and not genuinely disputed, summary proceedings (kort geding) offer a fast route from claim to enforceable judgment. A kort geding payment order can be obtained within four to eight weeks from first instruction.

Kort geding is particularly effective for collecting unpaid invoices where the underlying transaction is not seriously contested. The voorzieningenrechter assesses whether the claim is plausibly due, and where the answer is yes, orders payment. The ruling is immediately enforceable, and combined with a prior conservatoir beslag, it provides a direct route from unpaid invoice to collected payment.

For disputed claims, kort geding is less useful. If the debtor has a serious defence (disputing the existence of the contract, the quality of performance, the calculation of the amount, or similar), the summary proceeding judge may decline to rule on the basis that the matter requires the evidence and analysis of a regular merits procedure. In those cases, the proper route is a regular commercial claim, possibly combined with conservatoir beslag to secure the eventual judgment.

Bankruptcy petition as a collection tool in the Netherlands

Under Dutch insolvency law, a creditor with an unpaid and undisputed claim can file a bankruptcy petition against the debtor, provided the debtor has at least one other unpaid creditor (the so-called pluraliteit van schuldeisers requirement). This route is aggressive, narrowly available, and should be used with care.

A Dutch bankruptcy petition (faillissementsverzoek) is filed with the District Court. If the court is satisfied that the debtor has ceased paying its debts, it can declare the debtor bankrupt. Because bankruptcy has serious consequences for the debtor, including personal liability of directors under article 2:248 of the Dutch Civil Code, the filing of the petition itself often produces immediate payment: debtors that can pay will almost always prefer to pay the petitioner rather than let a bankruptcy order be made.

The bankruptcy route is only available for genuinely undisputed claims. The Dutch Supreme Court has held that the procedure cannot be used as a debt collection tool for disputed amounts, because the bankruptcy court is not equipped to resolve contested merits questions. Using it for a disputed claim exposes the creditor to liability for the debtor's costs and potentially for damages. We use the bankruptcy route selectively, for undisputed claims where the debtor's payment behaviour already suggests insolvency issues, and we advise clients clearly about the risks when the situation is borderline.

Cross-border enforcement from the Netherlands

Where the debtor is based outside the Netherlands, the procedural framework depends on the jurisdiction. Within the EU, the Brussels I Recast Regulation (Regulation 1215/2012) and the European Enforcement Order for uncontested claims (Regulation 805/2004) provide streamlined routes for cross-border enforcement of judgments. Outside the EU, enforcement typically requires a separate recognition procedure in the debtor's jurisdiction.

For a Dutch creditor enforcing against a debtor in another EU member state, a Dutch judgment is directly enforceable in the target jurisdiction under Brussels I Recast, without separate exequatur proceedings. For a Dutch judgment against a debtor outside the EU, enforcement depends on the recognition rules of the target jurisdiction, which vary widely. We coordinate with foreign counsel on cross-border enforcement as part of our general debt collection practice.

For foreign creditors enforcing against a debtor in the Netherlands, the mirror-image procedures apply. EU judgments can be enforced directly in the Netherlands under Brussels I Recast. Non-EU judgments generally require a separate recognition procedure before a Dutch court, following the framework developed in the Gazprombank line of cases, which we handle as part of our enforcement practice.

Our experience with commercial debt collection

In our practice we regularly collect commercial debts for international creditors from Dutch-based debtors. The typical file starts with an unpaid invoice (or a series of them), moves through a formal demand letter that brings statutory commercial interest and recovery costs into play, and escalates to pre-judgment attachment and summary proceedings when the debtor does not pay voluntarily. A significant share of these files resolve at the demand-letter or attachment stage without formal proceedings, which is usually the most cost-effective outcome for the creditor. For matters that do reach court, we typically combine kort geding with conservatoir beslag to compress the timeline from unpaid invoice to collected payment to a few weeks.

Working with MAAK Advocaten on debt collection

Our commercial debt collection practice runs in English, German and Dutch. Clients reach the specialist handling the file directly, and fees are agreed in advance as described on our lawyer fees page. For straightforward demand letter mandates we work on fixed fees. For attachment and enforcement work we work on hourly rates or hybrid arrangements with a defined initial budget. In litigated collection matters, the statutory recovery cost allowance and the liquidatietarief cost recovery together usually offset a meaningful share of the fees. The debt collection practice is led by Remko Roosjen.

If you are dealing with an unpaid invoice from a Dutch counterparty, or with a systematic payment issue across a Dutch trading relationship, an initial conversation is at no charge. Read more about MAAK Advocaten.

Call +31 20 210 31 38, email mail@maakadvocaten.nl, or visit our contact page. MAAK Advocaten is based at Kraanspoor 34, 1033 SE Amsterdam.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the statutory commercial interest rate for late payments in the Netherlands?

The statutory commercial interest rate under articles 6:119a and 6:119b of the Dutch Civil Code is calculated by reference to the European Central Bank's main refinancing operation rate plus a statutory margin, with the combined rate published twice a year. It applies automatically to overdue B2B commercial payments, on top of any contractually agreed interest. The creditor is also entitled to a fixed recovery cost allowance starting at 40 euro per invoice, with higher amounts for larger claims on a sliding scale.

How quickly can a pre-judgment attachment be obtained in the Netherlands?

A pre-judgment attachment (conservatoir beslag) is typically obtained within one to three working days after the request is filed with the voorzieningenrechter. The decision is made ex parte, without prior notice to the debtor, and once granted the attachment can be served by a Dutch bailiff on bank accounts, receivables, real property or other assets. For urgent matters, same-day or next-day decisions are sometimes possible.

Can I file a bankruptcy petition to collect a disputed debt from a Dutch company?

No, not for a genuinely disputed debt. The Dutch Supreme Court has held that the bankruptcy petition procedure cannot be used as a collection tool for contested claims, because the bankruptcy court is not equipped to resolve merits disputes. A petitioner who files against a debtor with a serious defence can be ordered to pay the debtor's costs and, in some cases, damages. The bankruptcy route is appropriate only for clearly undisputed claims where the debtor's broader payment behaviour also suggests it has ceased paying its debts generally.