Because of the group WE ARE HERE, the phenomenon of squatting has gained a lot of attention again after the squatting of a company building in Westpoort. When the owner came to assess the situation, he was denied access, which led to a lot of indignation.
But what about the legislation on squatting? In an article published in the magazine Huurrecht in Praktijk (HIP) I explain this and discuss developments in the field of squatting up to and including 2018.
The article discusses, among other things, that there are 3 ways to achieve eviction of squatters:
– Criminal eviction
The initiative lies with the Public Prosecutor’s Office. According to the policy rules of the Public Prosecution Service, a criminal eviction is announced, but not within 7 days after the announcement. The squatters can then contest the proportionality of the eviction in summary proceedings.
The advantage for the owner of this type of eviction is that the costs are for the State. Disadvantage is that the owner is dependent on the Public Prosecutor’s Office as to whether and when the eviction will take place.
– Civil law eviction
With this form, the owner himself starts summary proceedings against the squatters. The judge will then assess whether the interest of the squatters’ right of residence outweighs the interest of the owner to have the property at his disposal. Such an interest may be that the owner has concrete plans for the property in the short term.
Advantage for the owner of this type of eviction is that it is possible to determine when this means is being used, the disadvantage is the costs.
– Administrative eviction
In the case of administrative law evictions, squatting is also contrary to public law regulations. If, for example, the zoning plan does not have a residential purpose (but, for example, a business), then squatting is contrary to the zoning plan. The owner can then request enforcement. This was applied, for example, to the squatting of the ADM site in Amsterdam North.
Here again, the advantage for the owner is that the costs are, in principle, for the enforcing authority; As well, the disadvantage is again that the initiative does not lie with the owner.
You can read more in this article about these types of evictions and many examples of the trade-off between the squatters’ rights and the interests of the owner. It also discusses case law on, among other things, the definition of squatting, the identity of the squatter and government liability for squatting.
Read the article here.
Any questions? Please contact us.
Advocaat Ginio Beij: firstname.lastname@example.org