Skip to Content
Altroverso
  • Practice
    • The Altroverso Practice
    • How It Works
    • Why We Do It
    • About
    • Founders
    • FAQ
  • Services
    • Document & Evidence
    • Juridical & Contracts
    • Governance
    • Risk Management
    • Compliance
    • Digital & Privacy
    • Certification Enablement
  • Library
  • Academy
  • Contact
  • Client Area
  • 0
  • 0
  • Nederlands English (US)
  • CLIENT AREA
Altroverso
  • 0
  • 0
    • Practice
      • The Altroverso Practice
      • How It Works
      • Why We Do It
      • About
      • Founders
      • FAQ
    • Services
      • Document & Evidence
      • Juridical & Contracts
      • Governance
      • Risk Management
      • Compliance
      • Digital & Privacy
      • Certification Enablement
    • Library
    • Academy
    • Contact
    • Client Area
  • Nederlands English (US)
  • CLIENT AREA

Orders Taken After Control Was Lost

  • All Blogs
  • RULINGS
  • Orders Taken After Control Was Lost
  • April 18, 2026 by
    Paolo Maria Pavan


    What happened ?

    On 2 April 2026, the North Holland sub-district court in Zaanstad held two indirect directors personally liable after Tuinmaterialen.nl BV took customer deposits for garden projects it did not deliver.The company grew quickly and relied heavily on supplier credit. 

    It needed €500,000 in working capital. From April 2024, it stopped paying rent. It raised customer down payments from 40% to 50%. 

    It even offered discounts for full prepayment. The court found that from 1 June 2024, the business should have stopped accepting new orders.

    Most claimants won. The directors were ordered jointly and severally to repay customer losses of about €30,098.72 plus statutory interest and €2,752.47 in legal costs. One claim failed because that contract was signed before the court’s cutoff date.

    Analysis

    This case highlights a key risk: taking new orders after knowing the business model is no longer sustainable.

    The court’s signal is operationally important for small businesses: growth does not protect you when your cash cycle, supplier dependence, and delivery capacity are already broken. Here, deposits became a survival tool rather than a funding source for projects. That changed the legal risk for management.

    The weak point was not only finance. It was also a judgment. The directors kept selling while financing was uncertain. Supplier credit was tightening. Orders were apparently not even being placed for new customers. 

    Many small firms wrongly assume they are safe as long as they are trading. This ruling shows the opposite.

    Governance

    Leadership failed to impose a stop signal. The directors treated continued sales as a rescue strategy. They made this decision instead of demanding hard evidence of deliverability. Oversight was too informal. Escalation came too late. Commercial momentum overruled operational reality.

    Risk

    The exposure was immediate: personal liability for directors, repayment of deposits, legal costs, loss of buyer trust, and collapse of continuity. For small businesses, accepting prepayments when delivery capacity is uncertain can turn a company crisis into a personal crisis for management.

    Compliance

    The ignored duty was simple: do not contract when you should know the business cannot perform or compensate the customer. The documentation gap also mattered. If you cannot prove orders, financing, and delivery capacity, your optimism has little defensive value.

    Daily operational takeaway

    Review every active order funded by deposits. If delivery depends on uncertain supplier credit or hoped-for financing, stop new sales now and document a board-level go/no-go decision within 72 hours.

    in RULINGS
    # COURT CASE COURT RULING Paolo Maria Pavan
    Paolo Maria Pavan April 18, 2026
    Share this post

    Share

    Tags
    COURT CASE COURT RULING Paolo Maria Pavan
    Our blogs
    • MARKET
    • RULINGS
    • RISK AND COMPLIANCE
    • Our blog
    Shared practice, shared risk after breakup

    Upcoming Events

    Explore what’s happening next and join the moments that matter.

    See All
    Your Dynamic Snippet will be displayed here... This message is displayed because you did not provide enough options to retrieve its content.

    Altroverso

    Altroverso creates and maintains ONE FILE: one coherent company architecture connecting governance, contracts, risk, fiscal control, digital systems, decisions and evidence.

    Different authorised stakeholders may see different parts. Every part must tell the same truth about who the company is, where it is going, how it operates, when it checks itself and why it acts.

    KvK: 56530021
    BTW: NL 852171936 B 01
    BECON: 746393

    2012-2026 © Altroverso. All rights reserved.

    Practice

    About Altroverso
    How We Work
    Why Altroverso
    Leadership
    FAQ

    Services

    Juridical and Contractual Architecture
    Governance and Risk
    Compliance and Fiscal Control
    Digital, Data and Privacy
    Certification Readiness
    Recovery and Remediation

    Knowledge
    • Library
      Latest Analysis
      Altroverso Board Brief
      Academy
      Client Area
    • Confidential enquiries
    • Use the confidential intake for a defined matter, an integrated assessment, implementation support, recovery work or a retained GRC mandate.
    Get in touch
    • +31 (0)85 40 19 174

    • Altroverso
    • De Stuwdam 33-35
    • 3815 KM Amersfoort
      The Netherlands
    Legal
    • Terms and Conditions
    • Data and Privacy
    • Cookie Policy
    • Salary and Employment Policy
    Website Logo

    Your privacy is part of our practice.

    May this website use optional cookies in this browser?

    Essential cookies support the operation and security of the website. Optional cookies help us understand how the site is used. You can read more in our Cookie Policy and change your choice later.

    Allow all cookiesOnly allow essential cookies