Terug naar Encyclopedie

Authority and Obligation to Enforce in Administrative Law: Leiden

The Municipality of Leiden is authorised but not obliged to enforce (art. 5:1 Awb), unless mandatory law applies. Motivation is essential; the offender can enforce this through the court in case of negligence, e.g. with Airbnb or terrace violations.

2 min leestijd

Authority versus obligation in Leiden

In administrative law, the principle of 'authorised but not obliged' to enforce applies, as confirmed in article 5:1 Awb. The Municipality of Leiden has discretionary authority in enforcement, but must motivate this on the basis of proportionality and care. Exceptions exist for mandatory legal norms, such as acute danger to public health in the city centre or around the university campus.

The Council of State applies the 'integral duty to motivate': the Leiden board of mayor and aldermen must explain why no milder intervention is taken, for example in the case of illegal Airbnb rentals in historic buildings, or why enforcement is omitted in the case of minor building violations along the Rhine. This prevents passivity in structural violations in neighbourhoods such as the Mare or Professorenwijk.

Borderline cases in Leiden

In the case of minor violations, such as temporary terrace extensions on the Breestraat, remaining inactive may be justified, provided it is documented in the enforcement policy of the Environmental Service. In the case of repeated non-compliance, such as noise nuisance from student housing, enforcement is mandatory. Case law (ECLI:NL:RVS:2021:567) states that policy rules of the Municipality of Leiden do not provide a free pass for non-enforcement.

The offender can demand enforcement via the administrative court if the Leiden administration enforces unlawfully or is negligent, for example by failing to supervise compliance with the APV in the centre. This balance safeguards both enforcement and legal protection for Leiden's citizens and businesses.