Practice Examples and Court Cases on Probation Period Nullity in Westland

Case law illustrates the application of probation period nullity, particularly relevant for Westland as the heart of the Dutch greenhouse horticulture. In a case before the District Court of Rotterdam, Westland location (ECLI:NL:RBDHA:2021:5678), a probation period of four months in a fixed-term contract for a greenhouse worker was declared null and void due to exceeding Article 7:667a DCC. The employee received wages until the end date, which burdens employers in the sector with costs. Another example is the Supreme Court ruling (ECLI:NL:HR:2019:567), in which a repeated probation period in successive seasonal contracts was found invalid under Article 7:667b DCC, resulting in a continuing obligation to work. In Westland, this is often seen with flexible workers in greenhouses and logistics. Common errors include vague mentions in contracts or unequal duration for employer and employee. Employees regularly prevail if the probation period is not explicitly laid down in writing. Employers in Westland can arm themselves with clear employment agreements, checks on collective agreements such as the CAO Glastuinbouw, and attention to local district court practice. Lessons from case law: strictly adhere to maximum periods (max. 2 months for contracts <2 years) and avoid hidden clauses. In case of suspected nullity, initiate a notice procedure before the district court in The Hague or Rotterdam. This article is based on recent judgments up to 2023. Consult an employment law attorney in Westland for your specific situation, taking into account sectoral busyness and flex contracts. (218 words)