Administrative Enforcement Procedure in Utrecht

Administrative Enforcement Procedure in Utrecht

The administrative enforcement procedure is a structured approach followed by the Municipality of Utrecht to address violations using enforcement measures, such as clearance or seizure. It offers an alternative to criminal proceedings and ensures fair treatment for Utrecht residents through strict rules. In this article, we explore the details, from the legal basis to your options and tips specific to Utrecht.

What does the administrative enforcement procedure in Utrecht involve?

Administrative enforcement under administrative law enables the Municipality of Utrecht, the Province of Utrecht, or the local water board to resolve violations without immediately involving the courts or public prosecution service. It often begins with an order for administrative enforcement or an order subject to penalty payment. If there is no voluntary compliance, execution follows, such as removing an illegal extension in a Utrecht residential neighbourhood or removing dangerous animals.

This approach is efficient, aimed at swift resolution, with opportunities for hearing and response. Unlike fines, it focuses on remedying the violation rather than punishment.

Legal basis

The procedure is set out in Title 5.2 of the General Administrative Law Act (Awb), including:

• Article 5:21 Awb: defines administrative enforcement (e.g., eviction, clearance, or seizure).
• Article 5:24 Awb: requires a specific violation.
• Article 5:25 Awb: order for administrative enforcement with threat of measures.
• Article 5:32 Awb: order subject to penalty payment as financial pressure.
• Article 5:35 Awb: recovery of forfeited penalty payments.

General Awb rules such as motivation (art. 3:46) and due care (art. 3:2) also apply. Local laws like the Environment and Planning Act adapt this to Utrecht-specific situations.

Phases of the administrative enforcement procedure with the Municipality of Utrecht

The steps are clearly defined:

1. Establishing the violation: The Municipality of Utrecht checks, for example, illegal occupancy in the city.
2. Hearing and response: You may respond first (art. 3:15 Awb).
3. Imposing the order: With a compliance period (often 4-8 weeks).
4. Checking compliance: Non-compliance leads to enforcement.
5. Executing enforcement: Costs are recovered from you.

Comparison: Order for administrative enforcement vs. order subject to penalty payment

Practical examples from Utrecht

Example 1: Illegal extension. The Municipality of Utrecht imposes a penalty payment of € 100 per day. Demolish within 6 weeks, or forfeit € 4,200 plus € 5,000 in execution costs.

Example 2: Nuisance dog. In cases of danger, a veterinarian may intervene (art. 5:21(2) Awb), with an order for the owner.

Example 3: Cleaning obligation. A hospitality business in Utrecht city centre must clean up within 14 days, or the municipality charges € 2,500.

Rights and obligations in administrative enforcement in Utrecht

Obligations:

• Comply with the order correctly and on time.
• Pay enforcement costs (art. 5:33 Awb).

Rights:

• Objection within 6 weeks to the Municipality of Utrecht (art. 6:3 Awb).
• Interim relief from the District Court of Utrecht to halt enforcement (art. 8:81 Awb).
• Proportionality check (art. 5:28 Awb).
• Compensation for unjustified enforcement (art. 5:37 Awb).

Comply in the meantime? The penalty payment stops.

Objection and appeal against administrative enforcement in Utrecht

Submit to the Municipality of Utrecht. No appeal possible without suspension. Urgent? Summary proceedings at the District Court of Utrecht. Success can withdraw the order or refund money.

Contact Het Juridisch Loket Utrecht for free advice.

Frequently asked questions

Tips for Utrecht residents

• Respond quickly to letters from the Municipality of Utrecht.
• Contact Het Juridisch Loket Utrecht for help.
• Document everything for objection at the District Court of Utrecht.
• Avoid enforcement by acting early.