Court Cases

Crowd-funding action in support of court cases ADM.


The ADM terrain in the West Harbor of Amsterdam will this year,  2017,  celebrate its 20th anniversary as a free space where community, culture and nature can grow and thrive. Since a few years ADM has been threatened by dubious and speculative plans for private profits, not in the interest of the Amsterdam city and destructive for the environment.  Members of the ADM community have in collaboration with 5 lawyers already taken op more than 20 court cases. These cases concern topics such as human rights, nature protection and investigation of corruption. This moment is more critical than ever and there are still many cases to come. For the costs of these processes we now request donations, any amount, however small, is very welcome.

The Foundation Mushkila Kabira is helping us managing this funding action, the donation is tax deductible:

Stichting Mushkila Kabira, IBAN: NL36 INGB 0007 9767 49       -    RSIN: 856543342

 

 

 

SUMMARY OF COURT CASES - reverse chronological order:

2017

 

Kort geding 'dwangsommen' / Short procedure 'penalties'

2017-03-14
ADM versus Chidda Vastgoed B.V. / Amstelimmo B.V

In December 2016 Chidda's bailiff started taking money from 4 ADM-rs their income. So far Chidda had only made a threat to claim the penalties every half year, but never started taking the money.

 

2017-03-28 verdict: Chidda wins
Despite Chidda never even came to ADM in the period for which they claim the penalties, appeal date yet unknown.

 

Hoger beroep 'bezwaar niet handhaven' / Appeal 'objection not enforcing'

2017-02-28
Chidda Vastgoed B.V. / Amstelimmo B.V versus municipality

Despite this case being between Chidda and the municipality, ADM was also represented by a lawyer and given time to speak.

 

2017-04-11 verdict postponed
2017-05-23 verdict postponed
cliffhanger...
 

2017-07-04 ?

 

Cassatie 'executiegeschil toegang' & 'hoger beroep kort geding ontruiming' / High court case 'interpretation case access' & 'appeal court case eviction'

2017-02-24
ADM versus Chidda Vastgoed B.V. / Amstelimmo B.V

ADM appeals to the high court in a merged case since the verdict on the 22nd of December 2015 is an interpretation of the verdict of the 13th of July or at least the part about entrance, which is upheld in the appeal on the 4th of April 2016.

 

2017-03-07 no verdict, case dismissed

 

Hoger beroep 'festival vergunning XIX verjaardag' / Appeal 'short procedure permit festival XIX birthday'

2017-01-05
Chidda Vastgoed B.V. / Amstelimmo B.V versus ADM

Against all future festivals and events Chidda appeals against the verdict previous.
No physical hearing takes place.

 

2017-03-05 verdict: ADM wins
In the verdict ADM is noted as the possessor of the property (although possession does not always imply ownership)

 

2016

 

Kort geding 'vergunning XIX verjaardag festival' / Short procedure 'permit XIX birthday festival'

2016-10-05
Chidda Vastgoed B.V. / Amstelimmo B.V versus ADM

With most of the artists, musicians and volunteers already up and running, a few ADM-rs go to court to defend the yearly festival, (hopefully) held for the 19th time.

 

2016-10-05 verdict: ADM wins
So the next day the festival opened

 

Hoger beroep 'kort geding ontruiming' / Appeal 'short procedure eviction'

2016-04-11
Chidda Vastgoed B.V. / Amstelimmo B.V versus ADM

This is where Chidda claims ADM prevented them is executing felling works (read throw 1 handful of mud at bulldozer) On the table lies a glossy brochure with pictures of a demolition wharf, however Koole could not present the judge with any calculations on the economical viability of their plan.

 

2016-06-21 verdict: ADM wins
No eviction is ordered.
Judge finds the presented plans unconvincing and points out the need for appeal only rises when there are new facts or changes to consider.

 

Bezwaar 'bomenkap vergunning'  / Appeal 'tree-felling permit'

2016-02-04
ADM versus the Mayor and Executive Board

2016-02-24 Chidda starts to chop the trees, unfortunately we received a message from the R.V.O. (the authority in these matters), in which they informed us that they see no reason to stop Chidda from chopping. The 1 handful of mud thrown at a bulldozer by a kid on the 29th, caused them to call the police and seize the works for the rest of the day. The next day they continue.

 

Nice quote from ADM-r:

Eerst een rechter die het over een rugschildpad heeft, die luistert naar een ecoloog die zegt dat in een gebied met 450 bomen geen muizen leven. Dat ransuilen niet van bos houden. Er geen nesten van ransuilen zijn gevonden, natuurlijk niet want die maken geen nesten die zitten in oude kraaien of eksternesten (krakers). Er ook geen beschermde roofvogels of andere beschermde soorten zijn. (foto buizerd)

Dan hebben we nu te maken met een wethouder die er wel om kan lachen en het gepast vind om er grapjes over te maken dat er vierkant gelogen is als het bewijs keihard geleverd wordt.)

 

Verzoek VoVo (Voorlopige Voorziening) 'bomenkap vergunning' / Request for interim measure 'tree felling permit'

2016-01-28
ADM versus the Mayor and Executive Board

On 2015-11-20 Chidda received a permit to fell 470 trees, but according to Arda (ecological bureau) inadequate research was done for the bats, birds and toads residing there. No plans for the plot presented themselves when Chidda was asked, only a summary of possibilities. This case was held to convince the judge to put the permit on hold until the outcome of the next case: the appeal against the permit...

 

2016-02-11 verdict: Chidda wins
Interim measure not granted

 

2015

 

Hoger beroep 'executiegeschil toegang' / Appeal 'interpretation of verdict access'

2015-12-18
ADM versus Chidda Vastgoed B.V. / Amstelimmo B.V

ADM cannot believe the judge could have meant (in the verdict 13th of juli 2015 about access for visits) enter every private space at any given time to execute any kind of works, so asks the judges in appeal to restrict this interpretation somewhat so it is again in accordance with the basic human rights to privacy

 

2015-12-22 verdict: Chidda wins
The judges kind of copy the verdict previous.

 

Bezwaar 'niet handhaven' / Appeal 'not enforcing'

2015-12-10
Chidda Vastgoed B.V. / Amstelimmo B.V versus municipality

Chidda objects against the municipality's decision not to enforce the areal planning of the terrain.
To enforce the areal planning (bestemmingsplan handhaven) would mean to evict the inhabitants.

 

2016-03-21 decision: ADM wins
Municipality decides to stick to previous decision to make an exception because the plans presented by Koole are not convincing them of immediate use after eviction. Amsterdam makes a point of not evicting for vacancy. The research needed to apply for the right permits (ontheffingen) will take at least one more year, for the bats (kleine dwergvleermuis) have to be recorded in several seasons

 

Bodemprocedure 'ontruiming' / In-depth procedure 'eviction'

2015-11-23
Chidda Vastgoed B.V. / Amstelimmo B.V. versus ADM

Chidda demands eviction for the same plans presented in the case on 29th of June.

Our lawyers pointed out that the size of ships Koole Maritime B.V. wants to store and repair (as mentioned in their publicity folder), can't pass by the Velsertunnel, in the Noordzee-kanaal, because of depth restrictions. Chidda's lawyer replied in court that the Velsertunnel wasn't a problem at all, since it is situated to the east of the ADM along the Noordzee-kanaal (NOT!)

 

2016-01-06 verdict: ADM wins
Judge finds plans unrealistic

 

Executiegeschil 'toegang' / Interpretation case 'access'

2015-11-16
ADM versus Chidda Vastgoed B.V / Amstelimmo B.V.

Residents of ADM ask the judge how far Chidda can take the right to visit, since Chidda wants to use this right to do all sorts of works around their homes and in their workspaces.
(during the hearing the judge did not allow for ADM's lawyer to finish his sentences and spoke out her opinion that we shouldn't feel entitled to the basic human right because of our chosen lifestyle.)

 

2015-11-30 verdict: Chidda wins
The judge decides Chidda can do anything at all in any space at all, in relation to development of their plans. This leads to Chidda now demanding 2 months worth of penalties at €500 per day (€28,000 total) for not gaining entrance to the terrain, when they never even came to visit.

 

Kort geding 'ontruiming' / Short procedure 'eviction'

2015-06-29

Chidda Vastgoed B.V / Amstelimmo B.V. Versus 114 residents of ADM + some people living next to ADM

Chidda demands total eviction per 1st of August based on an unsigned contract with Koole Maritime B.V. For the rental of a part of the terrain.

 

2015-07-13 verdict: ADM wins

Judge decides there is no emergency for eviction, since the plans presented by Chidda are not worked out enough to suggest immediate use, also the people living next to ADM get taken of the list. Chidda is allowed to enter for visits if they give a 24hour notice before.

 

 

Kort geding 'toegang' / Short procedure 'access'.

2015-01-20

Chidda Vastgoed B.V / Amstelimmo B.V. Versus 4 residents of ADM

Chidda c.s. Demands access to show terrain to possible buyers, but only summons 4 residents to court.

 

2015-03-25 verdict: ADM wins

Judge decides a verdict in Chidda's favor could not be execute since there are 122 more residents who have not been summoned to court, thereby dismisses their arguments.