# Interim measures at the Enterprise Chamber: appeal, review, and what survives it

Interim measures ordered by the Enterprise Chamber cannot be appealed in the ordinary sense. The only route to a higher court is cassation before the Supreme Court, confined to points of law, alongside a standing request to the Chamber itself to vary or lift the measure once circumstances change. This page sets out who files what, in what order, and what a party actually holds once either route closes.

When this route applies

This applies once the Enterprise Chamber (Ondernemingskamer, part of the Amsterdam Court of Appeal) has already ordered onmiddellijke voorzieningen (interim measures) inside pending inquiry proceedings: suspending a director, appointing an independent director or manager, suspending voting rights, or ordering disclosure of information. It does not apply to the initial request for such a measure, which is a separate corporate law and governance question with its own procedure, and it does not apply once the Chamber has issued its final findings on mismanagement after the underlying inquiry report is complete.

The trigger is narrow: a party affected by an existing order wants that specific order changed, lifted, or tested before the Supreme Court. Nothing here concerns the merits of the underlying dispute, only the measure itself.

Who acts and where

ActorBodyLanguageWhat they file
Party seeking variationEnterprise Chamber, Amsterdam Court of AppealDutchrequest to vary or lift the interim measure
Party seeking cassationSupreme Court of the Netherlands (Hoge Raad)Dutchcassation petition against the Chamber's order
Company and other interested partiesEnterprise Chamber or Supreme Court, as applicableDutchwritten response, observations
Onderzoeker (investigator), where one has been appointedReports to the Enterprise ChamberDutchreport on the measure's practical effect, if ordered to report

The Enterprise Chamber is a specialised chamber, so both routes stay within Dutch civil procedure rather than moving to a general first-instance court.

The sequence

1. The Enterprise Chamber orders one or more interim measures. Actor: the Chamber. Output: a written order.

2. The affected party chooses between two forks: a request to vary or lift the measure at the Chamber itself, or a cassation petition to the Supreme Court. The two are not mutually exclusive but serve different purposes.

3. For variation: the party files a fresh request with the Chamber, grounded on a change in circumstances since the original order. Output: a new order, replacing the earlier one from that point.

4. For cassation: the party's cassation counsel drafts and files the petition with the Supreme Court. Proceedings before the Supreme Court are conducted with Dutch-qualified counsel of record admitted to practise before that court.

5. The company and any other interested party file a written response. Output: observations placed on the file.

6. The Supreme Court reviews the petition on points of law only. It does not re-examine the facts found by the Chamber or substitute its own assessment of the evidence.

7. The Supreme Court either dismisses the petition, leaving the order intact, or quashes it and remits the point to the Enterprise Chamber for a fresh decision.

8. Where remitted, the Chamber reconsiders the specific point sent back and issues a fresh order limited to that point.

9. Throughout steps 4 to 8, the original interim measure stays in force unless the Chamber or the Supreme Court separately orders its suspension.

Deadlines

StepPeriodFrom what moment it runsWhat happens if missed
Filing a cassation petitiona short, fixed statutory term; no confirmed figure sits in the current registry, so no number is stated herefrom the date the Enterprise Chamber's order is giventhe order becomes final and cannot be tested in cassation
Filing a request to vary or liftno fixed term; the request stays open for as long as the measure runsfrom any material change in the underlying circumstancesthe measure continues unchanged until a fresh request succeeds
Filing a response to a cassation petitiona further statutory term; no confirmed figure availablefrom service of the petition on the responding partythe Supreme Court proceeds without that party's observations

Where a specific number of days would normally sit in this table, none is published because no entry in the current norm registry confirms it for this cluster. Check the current position with the Supreme Court's own procedural rules before relying on any timeline.

Documents and proof

DocumentWho issues itFormTranslation or legalisation
Enterprise Chamber order granting the interim measureEnterprise ChamberWritten decision, Dutchcertified translation needed for use outside the Netherlands
Cassation petitionParty's cassation counselWritten petition, Dutch, signed by counsel admitted to the Supreme Court barnone, used only within the domestic proceeding
Investigator's report, where orderedOnderzoeker appointed by the ChamberWritten report filed with the Chambercertified translation if relied on abroad
Company register extractChamber of Commerce (KVK)Extract, Dutchcertified translation for a foreign counterparty or court

Cost

A court fee (griffierecht) applies both to a cassation petition and, separately, to a request to vary or lift the measure at the Chamber; the tariff is published on the Judiciary's own fee schedule and is revised periodically. No confirmed figure for either fee currently sits in this registry, so none is stated here, and no estimate is offered in its place.

What drives the total where a fee does apply: whether the matter is classified under the company-law petition tariff or the ordinary civil tariff, and whether the filing party is a natural person or a legal entity, which typically carries a different band. Cassation additionally requires representation by counsel admitted to practise before the Supreme Court; this is a separate matter from the court fee and is not published here, consistent with the rule against publishing specialist rates.

Objections you will meet

The order is not appealable, only reviewable. This is correct: there is no ordinary appeal (hoger beroep) against an Enterprise Chamber order on interim measures, and cassation is the only route to a higher court, confined to law.

Cassation reopens the facts. It does not. The Supreme Court does not reweigh the evidence the Chamber relied on; it checks the reasoning and the application of law, nothing more.

A pending cassation petition suspends the measure. It does not, automatically. A separate request for suspension is needed and is granted sparingly, since the measure exists precisely to preserve a position while the underlying dispute continues.

Once a measure is varied, the earlier order disappears entirely. It does not. Variation replaces the order going forward; it does not undo effects the original order already produced.

Outcome and enforcement

If cassation succeeds, the Supreme Court quashes the order on the point raised and remits it to the Enterprise Chamber, which then issues a fresh decision confined to that point. If cassation fails, the original order stands and no further review sits above it, short of a fresh variation request if facts later change. If the Chamber grants a variation, the new order takes effect from that moment and the underlying inquiry proceedings continue on their own track, independent of the interim measure.

Enforcement operates directly against the company's own organs under Dutch law: a suspension of a director takes effect from the order itself, without a separate enforcement writ inside the Netherlands. What a party holds at the end is either a confirmed order, a varied order, or a remitted matter awaiting the Chamber's fresh decision, never a money judgment in itself.

Cross-border effect

An interim measure binds the Dutch legal entity and its officers in that capacity; it does not itself regulate a foreign parent or a foreign group entity, even where the underlying group structure sits partly outside the Netherlands. Recognition of the Chamber's order outside the Netherlands, where a foreign counterparty or regulator needs to rely on it, follows the general rules on recognition of civil judgments between the Netherlands and the other state concerned; no additional step is described here beyond noting that a certified translation is customary practice.

Where the affected director or officer is resident outside the Netherlands, the order takes effect for the Dutch office regardless of residence. It does not extend automatically to any function that person holds outside the Netherlands. For a related question on how appeal and review operates on a different corporate procedure, see the treatment of appeal and review in a share-issuance dispute, and for how a comparable procedure prices its own review stage, see costs and fees in a foreign subsidies notification.

What this does not cover

  • The initial request for interim measures, before any order exists.
  • Appeal against the Enterprise Chamber's final findings following completion of the inquiry report.
  • Criminal or administrative sanctions connected to the same underlying facts.
  • The cost of legal representation, as distinct from the court fee itself.
  • Recognition of the measure in a specific jurisdiction outside the Netherlands, which depends on that jurisdiction's own rules.

Questions

Can an interim measure ordered by the Enterprise Chamber be appealed in the ordinary sense?

No. There is no ordinary appeal against an Enterprise Chamber order on interim measures under Dutch law. The only route to a higher court is cassation before the Supreme Court, and that review is limited to points of law, not a fresh look at the facts.

Does filing for cassation suspend the interim measure while it is pending?

Not automatically. The measure stays in force while the cassation petition is pending in Dutch court unless a separate request for suspension is made to, and granted by, the Chamber or the Supreme Court.

What happens if the underlying circumstances change while the measure is still running?

A party can ask the Enterprise Chamber directly to vary or lift the measure. This sits outside the cassation route entirely, can be used more than once as facts develop, and carries no fixed filing deadline.

About this analysis

Eva Kuipers, responsible for governance and Enterprise Chamber matters, prepared this analysis. Her work focuses on inquiry proceedings, interim measures, and the governance disputes that reach the Enterprise Chamber under Dutch law.

Where the position on interim measures sits inside a wider governance question, for example a director's exposure across a group active in energy and renewables, or where the underlying structure includes a beneficial owner in the United Arab Emirates, those questions sit outside this page and are treated separately.

For the wider service context, see the firm's corporate dissolution service. Where a party needs the underlying corporate structure mapped before deciding which route to take, a structure report sets out the entities, the officers, and the registered filings behind the entity involved.

If you are weighing a request to vary against a cassation petition, route the question through a note rather than acting on the sequence above alone.

Last legal review: 2026-09-21