This is when you are entitled to reimbursement of all litigation costs

If you win a lawsuit and the opposing party is ordered to pay you legal costs If you are entitled to reimbursement, this is usually a flat rate. This means that you will not be reimbursed for your full legal costs, but rather a predetermined amount based on the value of the dispute and the complexity of the proceedings. It is rare for the opposing party to be required to reimburse the full amount of your legal costs.

Order to pay the actual litigation costs or the full litigation costs

If you are ordered to pay full or actual litigation costs, this covers all the costs you had to incur. This means not only the court filing fees and bailiff’s fees, but also the actual costs incurred by your attorney. But please note: a full award of litigation costs is an exception.

Full Award of Litigation Costs in Cases of Abuse of (Procedural) Law

In the law (Article 3:13 of the Dutch Civil Code) states that you may not invoke a right to the extent that you abuse it. Because everyone has the right to access the courts (Article 6 ECHR), it is not easily considered an abuse of procedural law. In principle, therefore, you are free to subpoena. However, if these rights are exercised in such a way that there is no reasonable purpose, if there is no reasonable purpose for filing a lawsuit, or if the powers are used for a purpose other than that for which they were intended, this may constitute an abuse of procedural rights.

Supreme Court: Award of Actual Litigation Costs in Cases of Abuse of Rights

Full Award of Litigation Costs in Cases of Manifestly Unfounded Claims

Lexys’ attorneys have succeeded in several cases in securing a ruling that the opposing party must pay their client a fair reimbursement of litigation costs. One of those cases was heard in 2018 before the Gelderland District Court (ECLI:NL:RBGEL:2018:4649). In that case, a mother sued her son for a sum of money. If evidence She submitted an acknowledgment of debt. What she didn't tell the court was that she had already written off that money.

According to the court, her claim lacked “any factual basis.”. In addition, she had:

“has on several occasions explicitly and unconditionally taken the position that the admission of debt (…) was drawn up improperly and is incorrect, and that she does not consent to it.”. 

The woman must therefore reimburse her son in full for the legal fees he incurred.

Deviations from Liquidation Rates in Cases of Misrepresentation to the Court

In another case, an opposing party to one of our clients had provided the court with incorrect information when filing a writ of attachment. The case involved a prejudgment attachment in connection with a claim that could only have been filed if the plaintiff in question had been the (economic) owner of the real property at issue in those proceedings. However, that plaintiff had never been the owner, and her attorney was aware of this. Nevertheless, the attachment was executed.

Lexys’s litigation attorney therefore sought the lifting of the attachment and an order requiring the defendant to pay the full legal costs incurred by the party subject to the attachment. In its judgment of August 1, 2024, the Zeeland-West-Brabant District Court granted that claim (case number 423514, unpublished).

According to the court, a “misleading impression” outlined in order to be able to attach the property. The court refers to the plaintiff’s arguments regarding ownership of the property “incorrect and untrue”. All of this led the judge in preliminary relief proceedings to deviate from the standard liquidation rates:

“After all, Mr. [X] was aware of the legal circumstances and, against his better judgment and solely for the purpose of obtaining the leave, presented a misleading picture in the Petition.”

and:

“The judge presiding over the preliminary relief proceedings assumes that deviating from the standard liquidation rate may serve as a disciplinary measure to ensure that the judge is provided with accurate and complete information in the future.” 

Litigation as a revenue model is unlawful

In a recent case, an order to pay actual litigation costs was also issued. A man had built a business model around filing GDPR Requests for Online Stores and took advantage of their ignorance. If they didn’t respond quickly enough, he had already served them with a summons. According to the judgment, the man had filed approximately 90 requests for access to records and had brought several similar lawsuits. In one of those cases, our attorney presented a defense and sought an order requiring the opposing party to reimburse all legal fees incurred on behalf of her client. That claim (involving over €10k in fees) was granted by the North Holland District Court (ECLI:NL:RBNHO:2026:8285) assigned.

A full award of litigation costs is exceptional, but possible

That last case was also covered in the national media attention, in part due to the high legal costs award that was handed down. Het Financieele Dagblad wrote: “In this case, the court also ordered the plaintiff to pay the full legal costs, amounting to over €10,000.”. However, this is an exception. If you want to know whether legal proceedings in your case are being conducted unlawfully, or whether there has been deception of such a nature that a deviation from the standard fees is warranted, please contact Contact the litigation specialist at Lexys Advocaten.