Was your non-compete or relationship clause validly agreed? Check your age at signing, the signed contract and attachments, and the written justification for a fixed-term contract. A formal defect and later judicial annulment after a balancing of interests are different issues.
This page focuses on validity and evidence. For scope after dismissal, penalties and practical solutions, read the main non-compete guide. Legal content updated: 20 October 2026.
The employment lawyers at Arslan Advocaten explain what the rules are, how the court views a clause, and what you can do in case of a dispute.
What is a non-compete clause?
A non-compete clause prohibits an employee from going to work for a competitor after the end of the employment contract or from starting their own competing business. The aim is to prevent business-sensitive information, customers, or know-how from ending up with a competitor.
A clause like this is often combined with other provisions, such as a summary dismissal-clause or confidentiality clause, so that the employer has extra assurance.
Legal basis
The legal basis for the non-compete clause can be found in Article 7:653 of the Civil Code. Among other things, it states that a non-compete clause is only valid if it has been agreed in writing with an employee who of legal age is. In a temporary contract a non-compete clause may only be included if there is a compelling business interest which must be substantiated in writing.
When is a non-compete clause valid?
Not every non-compete clause is automatically valid. A judge can annul the clause in whole or in part if it is unreasonable or does not meet the legal requirements. Below are the main conditions.
1. Agreed in writing
Oral agreement is insufficient. If the clause is in separate employment conditions, examine the signed document and its attachments. Attached conditions referred to in the signed document, or the employee’s express written agreement to the clause, can satisfy the requirement. Simply knowing that a handbook exists is not enough. See Supreme Court, 3 March 2017.
2. Only for employees of legal age
An employee must be at least 18 years old at the moment he or she signs the clause. A non-compete clause with a minor is void.
3. For fixed-term contracts: compelling interest required
A fixed-term clause needs a written justification accompanying it, explaining why compelling business or service interests make it necessary. Without a justification it is not valid. If a justification exists but the necessity is not established, the court can annul it under Article 7:653(3)(a). Merely referring to confidential information is not automatically sufficient.
4. Reasonable duration and geographic restriction
A non-compete clause must be reasonable in duration and scope. Often, a period of 6 to 12 months and a defined geographic area applies (for example, ‘the Netherlands’ or ‘the Randstad’). An overly broad restriction can be mitigated by the court.
5. Balancing of interests by the court
The court can annul a clause wholly or partly if it unfairly disadvantages the employee compared with the employer’s protected interest. This is distinct from the question whether it was validly agreed. Compensation under Article 7:653(5) is another remedy: it concerns a significant restriction on working elsewhere and is not transition compensation.
What is a non-solicitation clause?
A relationship or non-solicitation clause restricts specified activities involving customers or other business relationships. Its wording determines whether solicitation, serving a customer or other contact is covered. It does not automatically prohibit every contact. Where it restricts work after employment, Article 7:653 applies.
Examples of a non-solicitation clause
- The employee is prohibited from contacting the employer’s business relations within 12 months after the end of the employment agreement.
- The employee may not accept assignments from clients who have been clients of the employer in the past 2 years.
A non-solicitation clause can therefore also be unreasonable if it is drafted too broadly or if it is no longer necessary to protect the employer’s interests.
Annulment or mitigation by the court
An employee who is restricted by a non-compete or non-solicitation clause may ask the court to annul the clause in whole or in part. The court considers factors such as:
- the employee’s role and position;
- the duration and scope of the clause;
- the nature of the new role;
- the financial consequences for both parties.
Under Article 7:653(5), the court can order compensation for the period during which the clause significantly prevents the employee from working elsewhere. This is a separate remedy, not transition compensation or an automatic award equal to proven wage loss. The exception where the ending results from the employee’s seriously culpable conduct must be considered.
Documents for the validity check
Collect the complete signed contract, attachments, the handbook version at signing, evidence of receipt and consent, the fixed-term justification, subsequent agreements and job changes. Keep the full wording of duration, area, activities, clients and penalties. Do not assume a later amendment has automatically preserved or removed the clause.
Checked on 20 October 2026: the government still describes the modernisation as a proposal. The current Article 7:653 BW remains the starting point.
What can you do in a dispute about a non-compete clause?
Whether you are an employer or an employee: in a dispute over a non-compete clause it is wise to seek legal advice quickly. A lawyer can often help to have the clause mitigated, suspended, or enforced.
For employees
Always have the clause reviewed before you move to a new job. A violation can lead to substantial fines. A lawyer can also negotiate with your (former) employer about exemption from or buyout of the clause.
For employers
If you wish to enforce a non-compete clause, make sure you have solid evidence of damage or business interests. It is also important that the clause is not drafted too broadly or too generally. Our employment law specialists can help draft carefully drafted clauses tailored to the role and legitimate interests.
Arslan Advocaten helps with non-compete clauses
The employment law specialists at Arslan Advocaten have extensive experience with disputes concerning non-compete and non-solicitation clauses. We advise both employees and employers on the validity, interpretation, and enforcement of these clauses. We also assist clients in proceedings before the subdistrict court.
Contact Arslan Advocaten
Do you have a dispute about a non-compete clause or want to know whether your clause is valid? Get in touch with Arslan Advocaten for immediate legal advice. Our experienced employment lawyers support both employers and employees and provide a practical and strategic approach.
Frequently asked questions
What should I check first?
Check that the employee was at least 18, how written agreement was recorded, the contract type and any required fixed-term justification. Keep the signed document and the attachments that applied at signing.
Is a reference to a handbook enough?
Not necessarily. Where the clause is in separate conditions, strict rules apply to their attachment and the reference in the signed document, or express written agreement to the clause. Mere awareness of a handbook is insufficient.
Can a fixed-term contract contain a non-compete clause?
Only with a written justification accompanying the clause explaining the necessity due to compelling business or service interests. No justification means the clause is not valid; insufficient substantive necessity can lead to judicial annulment.
Does a relationship clause ban all client contact?
No. The wording determines the covered clients and activities. Soliciting, serving and ordinary contact must be distinguished. Article 7:653 applies where the clause restricts work after employment.
Is compensation for a restriction the same as transition compensation?
No. Article 7:653(5) concerns a clause that significantly prevents work elsewhere. The court can set a payment for the restriction period, subject to the statutory conditions and the exception for seriously culpable employee conduct.
Are the announced reform rules already in force?
As checked on 20 October 2026, the government still describes a one-year maximum and mandatory employer payment as proposed changes. Assess the clause under current law, not announced proposals.
