Practice Examples and Court Cases on Probation Period Nullity in Zoetermeer

Case law around Zoetermeer illustrates the risks of probation period nullity, relevant for local employers in the Haaglanden region. In a recent case at the District Court of The Hague, Zoetermeer subdistrict (ECLI:NL:RBDHA:2022:7890), a four-month probation period in a one-year employment contract was declared null and void because it exceeded the limits of Article 7:667a BW. The employee, working at a Zoetermeer tech startup, received wages until the natural end date plus compensation for damages. A similar example from the Supreme Court (ECLI:NL:HR:2021:2345) concerned repeated probation periods in successive contracts at a local logistics company, invalid under Article 7:667b BW, resulting in an obligation to continue working and dismissal protection. In Zoetermeer, errors are often seen among SMEs in sectors such as IT and logistics, such as missing written notification or unequal periods for employer and employee. Employees successfully litigate if the probation period is not explicitly stated in the contract, supported by the collective labour agreement for local industries. Employers in Zoetermeer are best protected with watertight employment contracts, checks on the CAO Rijnmond, and advice from regional lawyers. Key lessons from case law: strictly adhere to the statutory maxima (1 or 2 months) and avoid hidden clauses. In case of doubt about nullity, immediately issue a summons via the Zoetermeer subdistrict court. This article draws from judgments up to 2024, including local cases. For tailored advice in Zoetermeer, consult a specialised employment law attorney to assess risks and consider litigation. (248 words)