Dutch Summary Proceedings Attorney

Sabine Vletter is a Dutch litigation lawyer (advocaat) at MAAK Advocaten in Amsterdam. Litigation, actively conducting proceedings in the Netherlands before the court, is not one part of her practice; it is its core. Sabine acts for organisations that can no longer afford to wait: a counterparty that ignores its contractual obligations, assets that threaten to disappear before a judgment is obtained, or a conflict that has escalated to the point where only a judge can still cut through it. She moves fast, builds a tight case file and litigates with purpose – in summary proceedings when every day counts, and in proceedings on the merits when a final decision is required.

Because MAAK works daily with cross-border matters, Sabine is a natural point of contact for international and English-speaking clients who need to enforce their rights before the Dutch courts. She is fluent in the Dutch procedural system and translates it into a strategy that foreign companies can follow and rely on.

What is litigation, and when do you need a litigation lawyer in the Netherlands?

Litigation in the Netherlands is the practice of actively conducting proceedings before the civil court, in which a lawyer brings claims on behalf of a party, mounts a defence and strategically steers the entire procedural trajectory, from writ of summons (dagvaarding) to judgment.

You need a Dutch litigation lawyer as soon as negotiating no longer works and a judge is the only party who can still decide the conflict. In practice, that moment arrives sooner than expected.

A counterparty that repeatedly fails to perform but also fails to respond to formal demands. A payment default that keeps growing while your organisation carries the loss. A contract that has been unilaterally suspended while the other side hides behind legal smokescreens. In each of these situations, the added value of a litigation lawyer is not only legal knowledge; it is also the willingness and the skill to actually litigate, with all the procedural consequences that entails. Sabine Vletter has both. She appears in court weekly, knows the rules of Dutch civil procedure in detail and knows precisely which moment in a conflict is most effective to apply legal pressure, through a letter of demand, through a prejudgment attachment or through a summary procedure that confronts the counterparty with a fait accompli. This is exactly why organisations facing a commercial dispute in the Netherlands turn to her.

How does Sabine use Dutch prejudgment attachment (conservatoir beslag) as a litigation instrument?

A prejudgment attachment (conservatoir beslag) is, in the hands of an experienced litigation lawyer, not the closing act of a procedure but a strategic instrument.

It immediately ties down the counterparty, freezes assets before a judgment even exists and creates negotiating pressure that sometimes accelerates an out-of-court solution where months of demand letters had achieved nothing.

Sabine Vletter masters the technique of prejudgment attachment from the first petition to the eventual enforcement. She drafts the petition to the interim relief judge (voorzieningenrechter), carefully substantiates the grounds and the amount of the claim and ensures that leave is granted – usually without the counterparty knowing in advance. After the bailiff (deurwaarder) has levied the attachment, the main rule is that proceedings on the merits (bodemprocedure) must be started within 14 days, unless the court has set a different term. Equally important is the other side of the coin: when your organisation is confronted with an attachment that is disproportionate or based on an unsound claim, Sabine challenges it. She starts an enforcement dispute in interim proceedings, demonstrates summarily that the underlying claim is unsound or offers a bank guarantee (bankgarantie) as an alternative, so that your business is unblocked as quickly as possible.

How does Sabine conduct Dutch summary proceedings (kort geding), and when do you win?

You win summary proceedings (kort geding) when you can demonstrate an urgent interest, your claim is highly plausible and the requested measure is proportionate to the interests of the counterparty.

All three elements must convince: a case file that is weak on a single point is enough reason for the interim relief judge to dismiss the claim.

Sabine Vletter therefore prepares summary proceedings as if they were proceedings on the merits. She maps out the facts sharply, selects the evidence that the judge can review within a short time frame and formulates the claim so precisely that the court has no room to take an intermediate position. That last point is a real risk in summary proceedings, namely that a claim formulated too broadly leads to a partial award that the counterparty presents as a victory. She acts both as claimant and as defendant in summary proceedings, among others in the case of:

• Specific performance of contractual obligations that the counterparty has unilaterally suspended
• A prohibition on unlawful publications or damaging statements about your organisation
• Lifting a prejudgment attachment that is blocking your business operations
• Preventing a threatened enforcement sale of business assets or real estate
• An advance on damages when liability is evident but the counterparty does not pay
• Enforcement of a non-compete clause (non-concurrentiebeding) that is being breached by a former contracting party

The interim relief judge usually rules within two weeks of the hearing. Sabine ensures that this ruling is not the end point but the starting point of the next step: in most cases, a won summary procedure brings the counterparty to the table for a final settlement or opens the way to proceedings on the merits from a position of strength.

When is a breach of contract serious enough to litigate immediately?

A breach of contract (wanprestatie) justifies immediate legal action when the failure is structural, when the counterparty does not respond despite a notice of default (ingebrekestelling), or when the loss to your organisation increases with each day of delay and will be difficult or impossible to recover. Sabine Vletter quickly distinguishes between two types of situation, each of which requires a different approach.

The first situation is one in which litigating is the fastest route to recovery: the facts are clear, the breach is evident and the counterparty has no genuine defence. Here, summary proceedings for specific performance or fast proceedings on the merits combined with a prejudgment attachment are the appropriate route. The second situation is more complex: the facts are disputed, the counterparty mounts a substantive defence or the interpretation of the contract is not unambiguous. Here, careful preparation of proceedings on the merits is more effective than a hasty summary procedure that may founder on procedural details. That assessment – when do you litigate, and by which route – is precisely where the added value of a specialised litigation lawyer lies. Sabine gives you that assessment directly and without detours, so that your organisation loses no time or money on a strategy that is not the strongest in legal terms.

Case example: A counterparty refused to accept and pay for 500,000 ordered products and disputed the formation of the agreement. MAAK Advocaten litigated on behalf of the supplier, and the ’s-Hertogenbosch Court of Appeal ruled on appeal that a valid sales contract (koopovereenkomst) did exist. The counterparty was ordered to pay over € 1.3 million in damages, plus over € 67,000 in legal costs (ECLI:NL:GHSHE:2025:2680).

How does Sabine build a watertight case file (procesdossier)?

A strong case file is the foundation of everything in litigation: without ordered, complete and convincing evidence, even the strongest legal theory is vulnerable before the court.

Sabine Vletter therefore devotes exceptional attention to building the file – not as an administrative task, but as strategic preparation for what the counterparty is going to argue.

Concretely, this means that she inventories which facts are established and which are disputed, determines which evidence is available for each disputed fact and identifies the weak points in your position before the counterparty attacks them. On that basis she drafts the writ of summons (dagvaarding), the petition or the procedural documents – tightly formulated, without superfluous details that dilute the core of the claim, and with the facts structured in the way that convinces the court most quickly. When evidence is missing or insufficient, Sabine advises on the options to gather it: a preliminary witness examination (voorlopig getuigenverhoor), a preliminary expert report (voorlopig deskundigenbericht) or a disclosure request (exhibitieverzoek) that obliges the counterparty to produce relevant documents. Timely evidence gathering, namely before the procedure begins, is in litigation the difference between a case you can win and a case you lose for lack of evidence.

What are the costs of litigation in Amsterdam in 2026?

The costs of civil proceedings 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 for a prejudgment attachment or a case of undetermined value, the fee is € 735.

Sabine Vletter always discusses the cost structure transparently in advance. In that discussion she weighs what a procedure realistically yields, how great the chance is that the counterparty will be ordered to pay the legal costs and whether the winning party can recover its actual legal costs – something that does not automatically apply in standard civil proceedings but is possible in certain situations. At MAAK, Sabine generally works on an hourly basis; in addition, MAAK offers the LAAP approach (Law As A Product) for a fixed price per defined litigation trajectory, so that you know in advance exactly what the procedure will cost.

How does Sabine Vletter perform under pressure – and why does that make the difference?

Of all areas of law, litigation is the most time-sensitive. A deadline that is missed, a piece of evidence submitted too late or a claim formulated too broadly – in the courtroom, these are mistakes that cannot be undone.

Sabine Vletter works systematically and sharply, precisely when the pressure is high and the margins are tight.

That systematic character translates into the way she keeps her clients informed: you always know what the next procedural step is, what is required for it and what you can expect from her. There are no surprises in the courtroom that you did not see coming. That clarity is not a luxury in a litigation trajectory – it is a condition for good cooperation under pressure. Whether it concerns levying a prejudgment attachment within 24 hours, conducting summary proceedings on three days’ preparation or preparing proceedings on the merits in a complex breach-of-contract case, including in international commercial disputes: MAAK Advocaten in Amsterdam is ready.

Are you facing a conflict that requires immediate legal action? Contact Sabine Vletter for a no-obligation conversation on +31 (0) 20 210 31 38 or mail@maakadvocaten.nl. She assesses your situation quickly, advises you directly on the most effective approach and acts immediately when that is what the matter requires.