Jelke van Uden is a legal specialist (jurist) at MAAK Advocaten in Amsterdam who focuses entirely on the legal problems that affect entrepreneurs most: a business partner that fails to keep its commitments, a collaboration that founders and is not ended cleanly, or a counterparty that unilaterally ignores its contractual obligations. Jelke understands that a conflict between entrepreneurs is never only a legal problem. It touches the continuity of the business, the relationship with customers and suppliers, and sometimes the business strategy as a whole. She therefore always translates that commercial context into a legal approach that matches what your organisation really needs: clarity, speed and a manageable result.

For international and English speaking entrepreneurs who conduct a B2B dispute in the Netherlands, Jelke is an important point of contact within the team that handles litigation. She is soundly based in Dutch law and keeps the commercial interests in view.

Which B2B disputes does Jelke van Uden handle?

Jelke van Uden handles, as a legal specialist, the disputes that occur most often in daily business practice: situations in which two companies fundamentally disagree about what they agreed with each other, what they owe each other or how their collaboration should have been ended. Such disputes call, namely, for someone who not only knows the law but also understands the commercial dynamics.

Her practice focuses in particular on:

• Breach of contract (wanprestatie): proceedings in which a business counterparty fails to meet a core obligation, meets it too late or performs it defectively
• Termination and notice of collaborations (opzegging): disputes over whether a collaboration was ended lawfully, or whether notice without a valid ground or without observing the correct notice period was unlawful
• Dissolution of agreements (ontbinding): the out of court or judicial dissolution of a contract for an attributable failure, and the consequences for the rights and obligations of the parties
• Nonconformity (non-conformiteit): cases in which a delivered performance, product or service does not meet what the parties agreed
• Interpretation of contracts (uitleg): proceedings in which the dispute turns not on the facts but on the legal interpretation of what the parties agreed, one of the most underestimated causes of business conflicts
• Damages after breach of contract (schadevergoeding): quantifying and recovering the commercial loss your company suffered through the conduct or omission of the counterparty

Do you have a dispute with a business partner and would you like to know how strong your position is? Contact Jelke van Uden for a first assessment of your case.

What are your rights when a business partner fails to perform a contract?

When a business partner fails to perform a contractual obligation, you have, as an entrepreneur, three options in principle: claim performance (nakoming), dissolve the agreement (ontbinding) or claim damages (schadevergoeding). In many cases these can be pursued at the same time, depending on what the contract provides and how serious the failure is.

In these matters, Jelke van Uden always starts with a thorough analysis of the contract and the facts: what exactly did the parties agree, which obligation was breached, was the counterparty put in default (in gebreke gesteld) in time, and did your company itself meet all its obligations? That analysis namely determines entirely which legal route has prospects and which does not. A notice of default sent too late, or a complaint period that has expired, can undermine an otherwise strong claim.

Consequently, Jelke also advises her clients preventively: not only once the conflict has escalated, but as soon as the first signs of breach become visible. Reacting in time, recording matters in writing and taking the right legal steps before the damage grows further is, in practice, the difference between a case you win and a case you lose.

Case example: In a matter concerning outstanding invoices for services delivered, the counterparty argued afterwards that the quality was insufficient. The court rejected this defence because no complaint had been filed in time and the substantiation was inadequate. The claim was largely awarded, including interest and legal costs. This ruling also held up fully on appeal (hoger beroep) (ECLI:NL:RBAMS:2022:8587; ECLI:NL:GHAMS:2023:2475).

How does Jelke handle the termination of a business collaboration in legal terms?

The termination of a business collaboration is lawful when it takes place on a valid ground, observing the agreed or reasonable notice period and without abuse of circumstances. If one of these elements is missing, the terminating party may be liable for the damage the other party suffers as a result.

In practice, however, collaboration disputes rarely concern one clear moment at which everything went wrong. More often there is a long run up of increasing tension, shifting arrangements and unclear communication, and it is precisely that run up that the court ultimately assesses. Jelke van Uden is strong at reconstructing that run up: she maps the facts chronologically, determines which arrangements were legally binding and builds a tight case file from there. She distinguishes two positions that call for fundamentally different approaches. When your company was pushed out of a collaboration too abruptly or unlawfully, she claims damages for lost turnover and missed opportunities. When your company is itself the terminating party and is addressed for the consequences, she conducts the defence and critically tests whether the alleged damage truly results from your conduct.

Case example: In a matter concerning REACH registration costs, MAAK Advocaten successfully defended an entrepreneur who was addressed by a competitor over alleged obligations from a cooperation arrangement. The court ruled that the entrepreneur had taken its own legally valid position and dismissed all claims. This ruling was then confirmed in the proceedings on the merits (bodemprocedure), and the claiming party was ordered to pay the full legal costs (ECLI:NL:RBAMS:2025:4436; ECLI:NL:RBAMS:2025:6489).

When are summary proceedings (kort geding) worthwhile in a business conflict between entrepreneurs?

Summary proceedings are worthwhile in a B2B conflict when the counterparty does, or threatens to do, something that causes your company immediate damage and where waiting for proceedings on the merits lasting twelve to eighteen months is commercially not an option. The interim relief judge (voorzieningenrechter) usually rules within two weeks of the hearing.

In business practice, these are namely situations in which every week of delay works through directly into turnover, operations or the relationship with other parties. Jelke van Uden starts or defends summary proceedings (kort geding) in cases such as:

• A supplier or service provider that suddenly stops its activities while the contract is still running
• A former business partner that actively approaches customers or staff in breach of a non compete clause (non-concurrentiebeding)
• A counterparty that refuses to cooperate in winding up an ended collaboration
• Performance of a payment obligation where liability is evident but the counterparty does not pay
• A continuing agreement (duurovereenkomst) that has been unilaterally suspended or ended without a valid ground

The ruling in summary proceedings is an interim measure (voorlopige voorziening). Jelke and the team of litigation lawyers (procesadvocaten) at MAAK Advocaten deliberately steer, however, toward a won summary procedure ending in a final settlement, because after a loss before the interim relief judge the counterparty is usually willing to reach a reasonable solution after all. That saves clients the costs and the turnaround time of full proceedings on the merits.

How do you determine whether dissolution or performance is the right choice?

Dissolution of an agreement and performance are two fundamentally different legal routes, each with its own conditions, risks and financial consequences. The choice between them determines to a large extent which damages you can claim and how quickly you are free of the counterparty.

Jelke van Uden always makes that assessment together with her client, on the basis of the concrete facts of the case. Performance is namely the appropriate route when you still want to receive the counterparty’s performance and the contract is commercially valuable. Dissolution is the better choice when trust in the counterparty is damaged to such an extent that continuing the relationship no longer makes sense and you want to recover the loss you suffered. Practical considerations also play a role here: is the failure serious enough to justify dissolution? Was the counterparty put in default in time and validly under the requirements of the Dutch Civil Code? And how do you prove the extent of the loss in a way that convinces the court?

What does a business court procedure cost in 2026?

The costs of civil proceedings for entrepreneurs consist of lawyer’s fees on an hourly basis and court fees (griffierecht). For legal entities, the court fees in 2026 have been indexed and 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 summary proceedings or a request of undetermined value, the fee is € 735.

Jelke van Uden always discusses the cost assessment as a first step, before proceedings begin. That assessment covers not only the direct legal costs, but also the question of how much the counterparty can realistically pay if the case is won, how realistic the chance of success is and whether a settlement ultimately yields more than a judgment. At MAAK Advocaten, Jelke generally works on an hourly basis. Where appropriate, MAAK also offers the LAAP approach (Law As A Product) for a fixed price agreed in advance per defined legal trajectory, so that your organisation has cost transparency.

How do you prevent contract disputes with business partners as an entrepreneur?

Most B2B disputes that Jelke van Uden encounters can be traced back to contracts that looked good enough at the moment of signing, but left too much room for different interpretations in a conflict. Unclear arrangements about what a party must deliver, when payment is due and how the collaboration can be ended are, in practice, the largest source of business proceedings.

Jelke advises entrepreneurs preventively on the risks in their contractual relationships and helps with drafting or reviewing cooperation agreements, general terms and conditions (algemene voorwaarden) and termination arrangements. When a dispute nevertheless arises, she conducts settlement negotiations and draws up settlement agreements (vaststellingsovereenkomsten) that are also genuinely enforceable. Sometimes a preliminary witness examination (voorlopig getuigenverhoor) or an expert report is moreover worthwhile to strengthen the evidential position before proceedings on the merits begin, particularly in cases where the facts are disputed.

Case example: A counterparty refused to accept and pay for 500,000 ordered products, arguing that the agreement had never been validly concluded. 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).

Why do entrepreneurs choose Jelke van Uden for business conflicts in Amsterdam?

Jelke van Uden is the legal specialist for entrepreneurs who have a business conflict that affects their company and who need someone who is not only legally strong, but also understands what is at stake outside the courtroom. She knows that in a procedure an entrepreneur never looks only at the judgment, but also at what the case costs in time, attention and energy that is not invested in the business.

She therefore always works with purpose: as little procedure as possible where that is feasible, and as effectively as possible where it is necessary. She is direct in her advice, realistic about the chances and practical in her approach. Whether it concerns a breach of contract by a supplier, a collaboration that was ended unlawfully or a counterparty that refuses to pay: MAAK Advocaten in Amsterdam is ready to represent your interests as an entrepreneur in commercial disputes.

Are you facing a business conflict and do you want to know quickly where you stand legally? You are also welcome to request a second opinion on an ongoing matter. Contact Jelke van Uden for a no obligation conversation on +31 (0) 20 210 31 38 or jelke.vanuden@maakadvocaten.nl. She gives you direct and honest advice on your position, the feasibility of your claim and the strategy that best fits your situation as an entrepreneur.