In a judgment of 26 August 2026, the Midden-Nederland District Court required a landlord to comply with a Rent Tribunal reduction for serious damp. The central lesson is the effect of not taking the underlying dispute to court within eight weeks, rather than a universal right to a 60% reduction.
Editorial review: Arslan Advocaten. Updated 24 October 2026.
The Tribunal decision and the missed court period
The tenant had sought a reduction for damp problems. The Tribunal set a 60% reduction from 1 November 2023 until the defect was remedied; the decision was sent on 24 May 2024. The landlord did not apply it and later objected to the Tribunal itself. The court held that the eight-week route to court had not been used in time. Under Article 7:262, the parties were therefore treated as having agreed what the Tribunal determined.
Was the defect actually repaired?
The landlord did not sufficiently substantiate that the damp had been remedied. A specialist’s report described necessary measures but did not establish that they were completed. Later inspection information still indicated damp, while part of the work was left for a future sustainability project. An intention to repair is different from evidence that the relevant defect has ended.
The financial result in this particular case
The court declared that 40% of the applicable rent remained payable from 1 November 2023 until repair. It awarded repayment of €9,700.84 in overpaid rent, with statutory interest, and legal costs. It also awarded €102.21 in remaining construction-dryer electricity costs. Other expense claims were not all accepted, including items whose timing or evidential basis did not support recovery.
What tenants should preserve
Keep the Tribunal decision and its sending date, details of any court proceedings, a monthly comparison of rent paid and due, repair reports and invoices. Note when the defect was first notified. Ask for repayment with the calculation attached, rather than assuming the Tribunal will collect the money. Separate additional damage items from the rent difference.
What this judgment does not decide for every home
The percentage followed this defect assessment and procedural history. It does not establish that every damp home gives the same reduction or that every extra expense is recoverable. Had the landlord brought the underlying dispute to court on time, the merits could have been reassessed. This publication discusses a reported judgment and does not claim that this was an Arslan client case.
Documents to collect
- Tribunal decision and dispatch date
- Proof of the landlord’s response or court application
- Monthly rent and repayment calculation
- Defect notifications and inspection reports
- Invoices and evidence for additional expenses
Frequently asked questions
Is 60% a standard damp discount?
No. It was the reduction in this particular case.
Does objecting to the Tribunal replace going to court?
In this case it did not preserve the eight-week route to court.
Are all extra costs automatically recoverable?
No. The legal basis, timing, amount and evidence must be assessed separately.
Discuss the right next step
Send the complete agreement, relevant correspondence and the next deadline. We first assess the legal question, evidence and appropriate route. The first consultation is free and without obligation. Eligible individuals may qualify for subsidised legal aid; a personal contribution or other costs can remain. Where private fees apply, we agree the scope and expected costs before further work. A contact request does not itself preserve a statutory or court deadline.
Contact our English-speaking team · Tenancy law in the Netherlands · Choose your local office
Related tenancy guides
- Landlord ending your tenancy in the Netherlands: notice, grounds and your response
- Indefinite tenancy agreement in the Netherlands: ending the contract and tenant protection
- Dutch rental contract checklist: what to check before signing
