Puck Hoendervanger is a litigation lawyer (advocaat procesrecht) at MAAK Advocaten in Amsterdam. She assists companies in civil proceedings of every kind and size: from a writ of summons procedure before the subdistrict court (kantonrechter) to a complex proceedings on the merits (bodemprocedure) before the district court, and from an urgent matter in summary proceedings (kort geding) to appeal (hoger beroep) before the court of appeal. She also appears regularly in attachment cases. Puck acts for both claimants and defendants before every civil court in the Netherlands, including the Amsterdam District Court. She knows Dutch civil procedure down to the procedural detail, and her strength lies in translating a factual conflict into a tight legal case file that convinces the court. She switches gears quickly, communicates clearly and litigates with purpose.

Because MAAK works daily with cross border matters, Puck is a natural point of contact for international and English speaking clients who need to enforce their rights before the Dutch courts, whether as claimant or as defendant in a commercial dispute.

How does Puck put her knowledge of Dutch civil procedure to work for you?

Dutch civil procedure covers all the formal rules that determine how a civil case runs: how you bring a dispute before the court, what requirements apply to procedural documents (processtukken) and which procedural deadlines you must observe. Puck Hoendervanger commands these rules in detail and actively deploys them to your advantage.

In addition to the statute, the district courts and courts of appeal apply their own cause list regulations (rolreglementen). These determine how you file documents, when you request an extension and which house rules the court applies. Puck knows these regulations at the Amsterdam District Court and at other courts throughout the Netherlands. She ensures that your case is correct on every formal point and that a procedural slip never undermines a substantively strong position. Where others stumble over formal requirements, Puck has already anticipated that step for you, which is one reason companies rely on her for Dutch civil procedure.

How does Puck determine whether your case belongs before the subdistrict court or the district court?

The subdistrict court (kantonrechter) handles monetary claims up to € 25,000 and all employment disputes, tenancy disputes and consumer sales cases, while the district court (rechtbank) is the competent court for other civil disputes. Before the subdistrict court, representation by a lawyer is not mandatory. Before the district court, however, it is.

Puck Hoendervanger makes that assessment before your case begins. She analyses the financial interest, the nature of the dispute and the rules on competence. On that basis, she advises on the right court, the most effective procedural route and the court fees that apply. A case filed with the wrong court loses valuable time. Puck prevents that by answering the competence question as the first step, so that your case starts on the correct grounds immediately.

How does Puck guide you through a writ of summons procedure?

Puck Hoendervanger drafts the writ of summons (dagvaarding): the document in which she states, on your behalf, what you claim, from whom and on what grounds. The bailiff (gerechtsdeurwaarder) then serves the writ on the counterparty, after which Puck monitors every step in the further course of the proceedings.

After the writ of summons, these steps follow:

1. Cause list session (rolzitting): Puck brings the case before the court and the court sets a date for the statement of defence (conclusie van antwoord).
2. Statement of defence: the counterparty defends in writing. Puck analyses that defence immediately and prepares a sharp response.
3. Hearing of the parties (comparitie): Puck represents you at the hearing, answers the court’s questions and explains your positions orally. Here she also assesses whether a settlement (schikking) is in your interest.
4. Second exchange of submissions (if needed): Puck responds in writing to the positions of the counterparty.
5. Judgment or interim judgment: the court rules. Puck discusses the judgment with you immediately and advises on next steps.

Proceedings on the merits take, on average, twelve to eighteen months. Timely preparation determines the outcome, and Puck starts on it on day one.

Case example: In a matter concerning outstanding invoices for services delivered, the court rejected the counterparty’s defence because no complaint had been filed in time and the substantiation was lacking, in breach of the duty to complain in time (klachtplicht). The claim was largely awarded, including interest and legal costs. This ruling also held up fully on appeal (ECLI:NL:RBAMS:2022:8587; ECLI:NL:GHAMS:2023:2475).

When does Puck advise Dutch proceedings on the merits, and how does she prepare them?

Puck Hoendervanger advises proceedings on the merits (bodemprocedure) when you need a final judicial decision and a provisional measure (voorlopige voorziening) in summary proceedings does not offer sufficient certainty. A judgment on the merits is binding and becomes final once the appeal period expires. That gives your organisation certainty for the longer term.

Not every dispute calls for proceedings on the merits. Puck first weighs whether summary proceedings deliver the same result faster and more cheaply. If she concludes that a final judgment is necessary, she builds a tight case file. She selects the right evidence, formulates the claims concretely and anticipates the defences of the counterparty. As a result, you enter the hearing of the parties with a file that is correct on every point and convinces the court.

Case example: In a matter concerning REACH registration costs, Puck successfully defended an entrepreneur who was addressed by a competitor over alleged cost sharing obligations. The court dismissed all claims. The proceedings on the merits fully confirmed this ruling and also ordered the competitor to pay the legal costs (ECLI:NL:RBAMS:2025:4436; ECLI:NL:RBAMS:2025:6489).

When are Dutch summary proceedings (kort geding) the right choice for your situation?

Dutch Summary proceedings are the right choice when your situation is urgent and you cannot wait for the outcome of proceedings on the merits. The interim relief judge (voorzieningenrechter) grants a provisional measure and usually rules within two weeks of the hearing. Appeal is available against that judgment.

The interim relief judge does not give final decisions, but does grant powerful measures: a prohibition, an order or, in certain circumstances, an advance on a monetary claim. Puck Hoendervanger prepares summary proceedings with the same sharpness as proceedings on the merits. She demonstrates the urgent interest, makes the claim plausible and formulates the requested measure so precisely that the court can grant it directly. Typical situations in which she starts or defends summary proceedings are:

• Performance of contractual obligations that the counterparty has unilaterally suspended
• A prohibition on an unlawful publication or damaging statement
• The lifting of a prejudgment attachment that is disproportionate or unsound
• Preventing an enforcement sale of real estate or business assets
• An advance on damages where liability is evident

Case example: In summary proceedings concerning a disproportionate prejudgment attachment, Puck demonstrated that the claims were too high and that the attachment far exceeded the actual claim. The interim relief judge of the Amsterdam District Court reduced the attachment amount substantially (ECLI:NL:RBAMS:2024:2569).

How does Dutch appeal (hoger beroep) work, and when does it have prospects of success?

Appeal in the Netherlands is the procedure in which the Dutch court of appeal reassesses a judgment of the district court in full, both the facts and the law. The Dutch court of appeal does not give a vonnis but an arrest (an appeal judgment). For appeal in the Netherlands you always need a lawyer admitted to the Dutch Bar. The appeal period is three months after the judgment, while for summary judgments a period of one month applies.

After an unfavourable judgment, Puck Hoendervanger always advises first on the prospects of an appeal. She analyses what went wrong at first instance, which grounds of appeal are legally sound and whether new facts or evidence strengthen the case. That analysis prevents unnecessary costs. An appeal has prospects of success when the district court established the facts incorrectly, applied the law wrongly or failed to weigh important arguments. Puck drafts the appeal writ, conducts the proceedings before the court of appeal and monitors the strict procedural deadlines.

Case example: On appeal, MAAK Advocaten obtained a victory for a client whose counterparty refused to accept 500,000 ordered products. The ’s-Hertogenbosch Court of Appeal ruled that a valid sales contract (koopovereenkomst) existed. The counterparty paid over € 1.3 million in damages and over € 67,000 in legal costs (ECLI:NL:GHSHE:2025:2680).

Case example: In a dispute over a medical repatriation flight of almost € 300,000, the Amsterdam Court of Appeal upheld a reliance on error (dwaling). Under Article 3:53(2) of the Dutch Civil Code (BW), the counterparty then had to pay the client € 250,000 (ECLI:NL:GHAMS:2024:48).

How does Puck Hoendervanger help your organisation with prejudgment attachment in the Netherlands?

A prejudgment attachment in the Netherlands (conservatoir beslag) is a measure that you levy to safeguard recovery options even before a judicial judgment exists. It freezes bank balances, real estate or other assets of the counterparty so that they do not disappear while your case is running.

Puck drafts the petition to the Dutch interim relief judge and carefully substantiates the grounds and the amount of the claim. After leave is granted, the bailiff levies the attachment. The main rule requires you to start Dutch proceedings on the merits or summary proceedings within 14 days of the attachment. Puck coordinates that follow up trajectory immediately, so that the attachment retains its legal force. When the counterparty seeks to have the attachment lifted, she conducts the defence in interim proceedings and demonstrates that the underlying claim is sound.

Case example: After a prejudgment attachment, MAAK Advocaten obtained an order requiring an auction platform to provide a bank guarantee of € 500,000 as security for the claim of a client trading in precious stones (ECLI:NL:RBAMS:2022:5532).

What does litigation in the Netherlands cost in 2026?

The costs of civil proceedings in the Netherlands consist of lawyer’s fees on an hourly basis and court fees (griffierecht). For legal entities, the court fees in 2026 amount to € 3,083 for claims up to € 100,000, € 7,062 for claims between € 100,000 and € 1 million, and € 10,487 for claims above € 1 million. For a request of undetermined value, such as a prejudgment attachment, the fee is € 735.

Puck Hoendervanger always discusses the cost assessment in advance. She weighs the direct legal costs, the chance of an order against the counterparty for the legal costs and the realistic recovery options once a case is won. At MAAK she generally works on an hourly basis. In addition, MAAK offers the LAAP approach (Law As A Product) for a fixed price per defined legal trajectory, so that your organisation knows in advance where it stands financially.

Why do companies choose Puck Hoendervanger as their Dutch litigation lawyer?

Puck Hoendervanger combines broad knowledge of Dutch civil procedure with a practical, results oriented approach. She appears in court weekly and knows the procedural ropes at the Amsterdam District Court, the Amsterdam Court of Appeal and other courts throughout the Netherlands. Her track record shows successful outcomes in proceedings on the merits, summary proceedings and appeal, namely both as claimant and as defendant.

Companies choose Puck because she communicates clearly about chances, risks and costs. She advises on the most effective route before a case begins and ensures, throughout the proceedings, that your position is strong on every formal and substantive point. Whether it concerns a writ of summons procedure before the subdistrict court, proceedings on the merits over a breach of contract (contractbreuk), an urgent matter in summary proceedings or an appeal after an unfavourable judgment, including international commercial disputes: MAAK Advocaten in Amsterdam is ready.

Would you like to know whether litigating makes sense in your situation, and which route offers the best chance of success? You are also welcome to request a second opinion on an ongoing matter. Contact Puck Hoendervanger for a no obligation conversation on +31 (0) 20 210 31 38 or puck.hoendervanger@maakadvocaten.nl. She gives you direct and honest advice on your position, the expected costs and the strategy that best fits your situation.

Puck Hoendervanger is registered as a lawyer (advocaat) with the Netherlands Bar Association (Nederlandse Orde van Advocaten) within the Amsterdam district.