THE BOTTOM LINE
- Systemic Delays Are Not a Legal Defence: Government agencies cannot use internal policies, such as a “first-in, first-out” queue, as an excuse to ignore court-ordered deadlines for decisions. This ruling confirms that operational backlogs do not override legal obligations.
- Escalating Penalties for Non-Compliance: Courts will increase financial pressure on government bodies that fail to comply with initial rulings. Ignoring a court order can lead to shorter deadlines and doubled daily penalties in subsequent litigation.
- Significant Risk for International Business: Companies relying on the Dutch immigration system for talent acquisition face profound uncertainty. The extreme delays highlighted in this case pose a direct risk to relocation timelines, employee well-being, and strategic workforce planning.
THE DETAILS
This case revolves around the Dutch Immigration and Naturalisation Service’s (IND) failure to process a family reunification visa application in a timely manner. The applicant had already successfully sued the Minister of Asylum and Migration once before. In a March 2025 ruling, the District Court of The Hague ordered the Minister to issue a decision within a set period and imposed a daily penalty for non-compliance. When the government agency blew past that deadline and the maximum penalty of €15,000 was reached, the applicant was forced to file a second lawsuit.
In its defence, the government argued that its hands were tied by its own “first-in, first-out” (FIFO) policy, implemented to manage a massive backlog of applications. Under this system, the applicant’s file was not scheduled to be reviewed until January 2027—nearly two years after the initial court order. Astonishingly, the Ministry acknowledged it would likely miss any new deadline and asked the court to impose a lower maximum penalty in the new ruling, essentially pre-emptively admitting its intent to remain non-compliant.
The Court delivered a sharp rebuke. It dismissed the FIFO policy as an unacceptable justification for ignoring a binding judicial order. The judge noted that the purpose of a financial penalty is to be a compelling “incentive to act,” not a predictable operational cost. The Ministry’s request for a lower penalty was seen as undermining the court’s authority. Consequently, the Court drastically shortened the new deadline, ordering the Minister to issue a decision within just two weeks. To add teeth to its order, it doubled the daily penalty for non-compliance to €200, up to a new maximum of €15,000.
SOURCE: Rechtbank Den Haag (District Court of The Hague)
