How to Obtain a Freezing Order (conservatoir Beslag) in the Netherlands (2026)

Intro: Why the freezing order Netherlands regime matters in 2026

A freezing order netherlands practitioners know as conservatoir beslag remains one of the fastest and most effective routes to preserve Dutch-situated assets before a judgment is obtained, and the surrounding legal landscape continues to evolve in ways foreign counsel cannot ignore in 2026. Two themes are worth watching: court fees (griffierecht), which are adjusted periodically and shape the cost-benefit analysis for pre-judgment measures, and the ongoing implementation of the Wet vereenvoudiging en modernisering bewijsrecht (the modernisation of Dutch evidence law), which reshapes how you support an application with proof. For a claimant facing a debtor who may dissipate assets, the ability to obtain an ex parte attachment, often within a single day, is a powerful strategic advantage.

This guide sets out the procedure, timelines, costs and risks so that international litigators and in-house teams can brief Dutch counsel efficiently and act before assets disappear.

TL;DR: Conservatoir beslag is a pre-judgment attachment granted by the provisional relief judge, frequently ex parte, requiring leave (verlof) and usually the commencement of substantive proceedings within a court-set deadline. In 2026, plan for current court fees confirmed against the official schedule and a heightened emphasis on documentary and evidentiary support.

What is a freezing order (conservatoir beslag)?

Conservatoir beslag is a conservatory or protective attachment under the Dutch Code of Civil Procedure (Wetboek van Burgerlijke Rechtsvordering, abbreviated Rv). Its purpose is to secure a claimant’s monetary or delivery claim by freezing or seizing the debtor’s assets before final judgment, so that a later judgment can actually be enforced against something of value. Unlike a final or executory attachment (executoriaal beslag), which follows an enforceable title such as a judgment, the conservatory attachment is a precautionary measure taken in advance of, or during, the substantive dispute.

The scope of a Dutch freezing order is broad. It can be levied on:

• Bank accounts and receivables held by third parties (conservatoir derdenbeslag), including funds held by a bank on the debtor’s behalf.
• Movable property (beslag op roerende zaken), such as inventory, vehicles, machinery or artwork.
• Immovable property (beslag op onroerende zaken), such as land and buildings, registered against the debtor.
• Claims and other rights (vorderingsbeslag), including debts owed to the debtor by others.
• Shares and registered assets, including shareholdings and vessels or aircraft.

A crucial feature distinguishing the conservatoir beslag netherlands procedure from a final attachment is that it freezes rather than sells. The attached asset is secured, the debtor cannot dispose of it to the prejudice of the creditor, but the claimant cannot execute against it until it obtains an enforceable judgment and converts the conservatory measure into an executory one. The statutory framework governing these measures sits within the Rv.

When to seek a freezing order: strategic triggers

A prejudgment attachment netherlands strategy is worth deploying whenever there is a genuine and demonstrable risk that a judgment, once obtained, would be worthless because the debtor’s assets have vanished, been moved abroad, or been dissipated. The Dutch system is comparatively creditor-friendly on this point: the threshold for obtaining leave is not onerous, but the tactical judgment about whether and when to strike requires care.

Typical triggers that justify seeking a freezing order include:

• Risk of dissipation. Evidence that the debtor is selling assets, transferring funds to related entities, or restructuring to defeat creditors.
• Cross-border enforcement concerns. A foreign debtor with only limited assets in the Netherlands, a Dutch bank account, a vessel calling at Rotterdam, or Dutch-registered property, where speed is essential.
• Fraud or misappropriation. Where funds have been diverted and asset tracing points to Dutch accounts.
• Insolvency signals. Deteriorating financial condition of a counterparty, where securing assets ahead of a formal insolvency may still be possible.
• Serious contractual breaches. Non-payment or repudiation where the debtor’s solvency is doubtful.

Because leave is usually granted ex parte, the surprise element is central: the debtor is not warned and cannot pre-empt the freeze. That makes the freezing order netherlands regime especially valuable in fraud and cross-border scenarios where a debtor forewarned is a debtor whose money has already moved.

Legal basis and types of conservatory measures

The statutory basis for all conservatory attachments is found in the Rv, which sets out the formal requirements for the application for leave, the categories of assets that may be attached, the obligations on the applicant, and the mechanism by which a conservatory measure is later converted into an executory one. Every application is framed by reference to the relevant provisions of the Rv, and the provisional relief judge (voorzieningenrechter) grants or refuses leave on the basis of the petition filed.

The principal types of conservatory measure available in an asset freeze netherlands strategy are:

• Conservatoir derdenbeslag (garnishee attachment). Levied on assets or debts held by a third party for the debtor, most commonly a bank account. This is the workhorse of Dutch asset freezing.
• Beslag op roerende zaken (attachment of movables). Physical seizure or freezing of movable property such as goods, vehicles and equipment.
• Beslag op onroerende zaken (attachment of immovables). Registration of the attachment against real property in the land registry.
• Vorderingsbeslag (attachment of claims). Freezing of receivables owed to the debtor.
• Zekerheidstelling (security or caution). The court may require the applicant to provide security to cover potential damage caused to the debtor by a wrongful attachment.

Dutch terminology: a short glossary

• Conservatoir beslag, conservatory or protective attachment (the freezing order).
• Voorzieningenrechter, the provisional relief judge who grants leave.
• Verlof, the leave or permission to levy the attachment.
• Deurwaarder, the court bailiff who executes the attachment.
• Derdenbeslag, garnishee attachment against a third party such as a bank.
• Bewijsbeslag, evidence seizure, a distinct conservatory measure aimed at securing evidence.
• Zekerheidstelling, the provision of security by the applicant.

Step-by-step procedure to obtain a freezing order Netherlands (conservatoir beslag)

This is the operational heart of the freezing order netherlands process. The procedure is fast, document-driven and heavily reliant on precise drafting of the petition. Below the sequence is broken down into its constituent stages, with guidance on what to file, what to attach and where the common pitfalls lie.

Application and forum

The application for leave (verzoekschrift) is filed with the provisional relief judge of the competent district court (rechtbank). Competence usually follows the location of the assets to be attached or the domicile of the debtor. The petition must identify the claimant and the debtor, describe the underlying claim, state a provisional quantification of the amount to be secured, specify the assets to be attached and the type of attachment sought, and set out the legal and factual basis for the request. In practice the petition is filed by a Dutch advocaat, as litigation before the district court generally requires representation by an admitted lawyer.

Because the amount stated in the petition determines the ceiling of the attachment, and because the court typically fixes the secured amount at the claim including a margin for interest and costs, careful quantification is essential. Under-stating the claim leaves value unprotected; grossly over-stating it invites a challenge on proportionality grounds.

Ex parte procedures and the evidence required

A defining feature of ex parte attachment netherlands practice is that the debtor is generally not heard before leave is granted. The provisional relief judge decides on the papers, typically within hours or, at most, a few days. This preserves the surprise that makes the remedy effective. In some cases, for example certain attachments involving consumers or where specific rules require it, the judge may hear the debtor first, but for the standard garnishee attachment the ex parte route is the norm.

To succeed, the petition should be supported by documentary evidence that makes the claim plausible. Recommended exhibits include:

• The underlying contract, purchase order or agreement giving rise to the claim.
• Invoices, statements of account and correspondence evidencing the debt.
• Bank records or payment history where relevant.
• Draft witness statements or written explanations of the factual background, especially in fraud cases.
• Evidence of the risk of dissipation, where the case for urgency depends on it.

The practical significance of evidence has grown. The modernisation of evidence law places a stronger premium on a well-documented petition, and experienced practitioners increasingly front-load their evidence rather than relying on a light-touch ex parte stage. Provisional relief judges may scrutinise the plausibility of the claim more closely where the documentary support is thin.

Court orders and their content

If the judge grants leave, the order specifies the amount for which the attachment is permitted, the assets or categories of assets that may be attached, and, critically, the period within which the claimant must commence substantive proceedings on the merits (the eis in de hoofdzaak). This deadline is a defining safeguard of the Dutch system: a conservatory attachment is provisional and must be validated by pursuing the main claim. Missing the deadline can render the attachment liable to lapse or be set aside.

Security (caution) and undertakings

The provisional relief judge may condition leave on the applicant providing zekerheidstelling, security to compensate the debtor for loss should the attachment later prove to have been wrongful. Whether security is required, and in what form, depends on the strength of the claim and the potential for harm. Foreign claimants in particular should anticipate a possible security requirement and be prepared to arrange a bank guarantee promptly, since the leave and the attachment are of little use if the applicant cannot meet the condition attached to them.

Serving the order and the role of the bailiff (deurwaarder)

Once leave is granted, the attachment is levied by a court bailiff (deurwaarder), whose role is central to converting the paper order into a real-world freeze. For a garnishee attachment on a bank account, the bailiff serves the attachment on the bank, which then freezes the debtor’s funds up to the amount authorised. For movables, the bailiff attends and records the seized assets. The bailiff also serves the attachment documents on the debtor within the statutory timeframe, giving the debtor formal notice after the fact.

The professional organisation of bailiffs, the KBvG (Koninklijke Beroepsorganisatie van Gerechtsdeurwaarders), maintains professional rules and guidance for the profession. Instructing the bailiff clearly and promptly is essential: a delay of even a day between obtaining leave and levying the attachment can allow a fast-moving debtor to empty an account.

Immediate actions after the order: bank freezes and asset tracing

Speed after leave is everything. Immediate priorities are to instruct the bailiff to levy the bank garnishment netherlands attachment, to serve any additional third parties holding assets, and to progress asset tracing to identify further targets. A bank served with a garnishee attachment will typically freeze the relevant funds, though the precise timing depends on internal compliance processes. Where the debtor holds accounts at several institutions, parallel attachments may be levied to maximise the value secured.

Timelines, costs and court fees in 2026

Timing is the single greatest attraction of the freezing order netherlands procedure. In many cases the sequence runs as follows:

• Leave (verlof): often granted the same day the petition is filed, or within a few days, given the ex parte nature of the process.
• Bank freeze activation: once the bailiff serves the attachment, the bank freezes the funds shortly thereafter, subject to internal processing.
• Service on the debtor: effected by the bailiff within the statutory period after the attachment is levied.
• Substantive claim: must be commenced within the deadline set in the leave, failing which the attachment is at risk.

On costs, foreign counsel should budget for three components: court fees (griffierecht) payable on the application and on any substantive proceedings; counsel’s fees for preparing and filing the petition; and bailiff (deurwaarder) charges for levying and serving the attachment. Court fees are set by law and are adjusted periodically; they matter most for lower-value claims, where the fixed costs of obtaining and validating an attachment may consume a larger proportion of the recovery. The official fee schedule is published by the government (Rijksoverheid) and the judiciary (Rechtspraak), and counsel should confirm the current rate applicable to the value bracket of the claim before advising a client to proceed.

Where the court requires security, the applicant must also factor in the cost of arranging a bank guarantee or equivalent. The practical effect is that claimants tend to be more selective about small-value attachments and more focused on high-value or high-risk targets where the remedy clearly pays for itself.

Evidence seizure (bewijsbeslag) versus conservatoir beslag

Conservatoir beslag secures assets. Bewijsbeslag, evidence seizure netherlands practitioners rely on, secures evidence. The two are distinct conservatory measures serving different purposes, and confusing them is a common error among foreign counsel. Where the objective is to preserve documents, data or physical items that prove a claim (for instance in intellectual property, trade-secret or fraud disputes), the appropriate tool is bewijsbeslag netherlands practice, not an asset freeze.

Bewijsbeslag allows a claimant to have specified evidence seized and secured, typically held by a neutral custodian, pending a court decision on access. Like conservatoir beslag, it is granted on application and is subject to leave, security considerations and proportionality controls. In practice, the two measures are sometimes deployed together: a claimant may freeze assets and secure the evidence that supports the underlying claim in a coordinated strike.

How the evidence-law reform affects strategy in 2026

The Wet vereenvoudiging en modernisering bewijsrecht modernises Dutch evidence law and, in doing so, changes the strategic backdrop for both bewijsbeslag and conservatoir beslag. The reform strengthens expectations around the gathering, presentation and disclosure of evidence, which raises the bar for the documentary support behind an application and informs the timing of an evidence seizure relative to an asset freeze.

The practical consequence is that a well-prepared applicant assembles a stronger evidentiary file at the outset. Sample written-statement wording should state clearly the deponent’s knowledge, the source of each document exhibited, and the specific facts establishing both the claim and, where relevant, the risk of dissipation or evidence destruction. Judges are increasingly likely to expect this greater rigour, and counsel who front-load their evidence will be better placed both to obtain leave and to defend the attachment if the debtor challenges it. Official information on the reform is published through the government (Rijksoverheid), and counsel should confirm the current status and entry-into-force details before relying on any particular provision.

Enforcement routes after a freezing order Netherlands is granted

A conservatory attachment freezes; it does not yet realise value. To turn a freeze into money in hand, the claimant must obtain an enforceable judgment on the merits and then convert the conservatory measure into an executory attachment. Alongside the domestic route, several enforcement options and parallel instruments are available, and choosing the right one depends on the asset type and the cross-border dimension.

• Bailiff enforcement. The deurwaarder executes attachments and, once an enforceable title exists, carries out the sale or garnishment of attached assets.
• Bank garnishment (bankbeslag / derdenbeslag). The most direct route for cash: freezing and then collecting funds held by the debtor’s bank.
• Ship arrest. A specialist maritime enforcement route for claims connected to vessels.
• European Account Preservation Order (EAPO). An EU instrument under Regulation (EU) No 655/2014 that allows a creditor to freeze bank accounts across participating EU Member States through a single procedure, useful where the debtor’s accounts sit outside the Netherlands.

The EAPO is the natural comparator to conservatoir beslag for cross-border bank freezes. Where a Dutch attachment reaches only Dutch-situated accounts, the EAPO can freeze accounts in other participating Member States on a coordinated basis. In cross-border matters, close liaison with foreign counsel is essential to sequence the domestic freeze and the EAPO correctly and to avoid tipping off the debtor.

Ship arrest specifics for maritime claims

Ship arrest netherlands practice is a specialised form of conservatory attachment used to secure maritime claims by arresting a vessel while it lies within Dutch jurisdiction, the ports of Rotterdam and Amsterdam being obvious focal points. The procedure follows the conservatory attachment framework but engages maritime-specific rules and the relevant court and registry. Because a vessel is a mobile, high-value asset, arrest is time-critical: the window may be as short as a single port call. Claimants should have the petition and bailiff instructions ready to execute the moment the vessel is confirmed to be within reach. Release typically follows the provision of adequate security, such as a bank guarantee or a P&I club letter of undertaking.

Risks, release, lifting orders and sanctions

The freezing order netherlands regime is powerful, but it carries real exposure for the applicant. A debtor may apply to lift or vary the attachment, and the applicant who over-reaches faces liability.

Common grounds for lifting a conservatory attachment include:

• Insufficient evidence. Where the claim, on closer examination, is summarily shown to be unsound or not made out to the necessary degree of plausibility.
• Lack of jurisdiction. Where the Dutch court is not competent over the substantive dispute.
• Disproportionate harm. Where the attachment causes damage to the debtor out of all proportion to the claimant’s interest, or where the amount attached exceeds what is justified.
• Provision of alternative security. Where the debtor offers adequate security, the court will ordinarily release the attachment.
• Failure to commence the substantive claim in time. Where the deadline in the leave has lapsed.

A debtor can seek release on an expedited basis, typically through summary proceedings (kort geding), and the judge will weigh the competing interests. Crucially, a claimant who levies an attachment that is later found to have been wrongful, because the claim fails or was unfounded, can be held liable for the damage the attachment caused. This claimant liability for wrongful attachment is a serious risk that must be weighed before pressing an aggressive ex parte strategy, and it is one reason the provision of security matters so much. The evidence-law environment reinforces this discipline: an attachment supported by thin evidence is both easier to lift and more likely to expose the claimant to a damages claim.

Practical checklist for foreign counsel and briefing template for Dutch counsel

When time is short, a clear brief to Dutch counsel accelerates everything. Use the following twelve-point checklist to assemble what local counsel will need to file for leave and levy an attachment quickly.

1. Full legal names, addresses and corporate details of claimant and debtor.
2. A concise chronology of the dispute and the basis of the claim.
3. Provisional quantification: principal, interest and estimated costs.
4. The underlying contract and any variations or key correspondence.
5. Invoices, statements and payment records evidencing the debt.
6. Any evidence of the risk of dissipation or asset movement.
7. Known assets in the Netherlands: bank accounts, property, vessels, receivables.
8. Draft witness statement or written statement from a person with direct knowledge.
9. Details of any parallel foreign proceedings or planned EAPO application.
10. Confirmation of ability to provide security if the court requires it.
11. Contact details for the bailiff, and authority to instruct immediately.
12. An urgency assessment identifying the deadline by which the freeze must bite.

A short instruction email to Dutch counsel should state the target assets, attach the evidence bundle, confirm the budget and authority to arrange security, and flag the urgency window so that leave can be sought and the attachment levied without delay.

Comparison table: conservatoir beslag versus EAPO, ship arrest and bank garnishment

Working with bailiffs and local enforcement agents

The deurwaarder is indispensable to any freezing order netherlands strategy. Bailiffs are the officers who physically levy attachments, serve documents on the debtor and third parties, and later execute against assets once an enforceable title exists. Clear, complete and prompt instructions to the bailiff make the difference between a freeze that captures value and one that arrives after the funds have gone.

Practical points for foreign counsel working through Dutch counsel with bailiffs:

• Provide the bailiff with the leave order, the assets to be attached and the third parties to be served, ready to execute immediately.
• Anticipate bailiff charges as a separate cost line, in addition to court fees and counsel’s fees.
• Coordinate timing so that multiple attachments (for example at several banks) are levied in parallel.
• Rely on Dutch-language documentation, since formal steps are conducted in Dutch.

Information about the bailiff profession, professional conduct rules and enforcement practice is maintained by the KBvG, the professional organisation of Dutch bailiffs.

Conclusion: next steps for a freezing order Netherlands strategy

The freezing order netherlands regime, conservatoir beslag, remains one of the fastest and most reliable routes to preserve Dutch-situated assets before judgment, and in 2026 it is more important than ever to combine that speed with rigour. Court fee levels and the modernisation of evidence law mean that a well-evidenced, carefully quantified and proportionate application is not just good practice but a defensive necessity against challenge and wrongful-attachment liability. Foreign counsel who prepare a complete evidence bundle, arrange for security in advance, and stand ready to instruct a bailiff the moment leave is granted will secure the surprise advantage the remedy is designed to deliver.

When assets are at risk, the right move is to brief experienced Dutch litigation counsel immediately and act before the debtor does.

To identify local counsel for an urgent matter, see Litigation lawyers Netherlands, find local counsel.

Sources

1. Wetboek van Burgerlijke Rechtsvordering (Dutch Code of Civil Procedure – Rv)
2. Rechtspraak (Dutch Judiciary)
3. KBvG, Koninklijke Beroepsorganisatie van Gerechtsdeurwaarders
4. Nederlandse Orde van Advocaten (The Dutch Bar)
5. Regulation (EU) No 655/2014 (European Account Preservation Order)
6. Rijksoverheid, Government of the Netherlands (evidence-law reform and court fees)