The intersection between public and private law in Dutch environmental and planning practice encompasses all situations where governmental actions—such as granting permits, enforcement, expropriation, or entering into public-private partnerships—are directly intertwined with private legal relations, such as contracts, civil liability, and business rights. Examples include public-private partnerships (PPP) for large-scale infrastructure, concession agreements for waste collection, pre-development agreements for area development, or damage claims based on unlawful government actions (Article 6:162 of the Dutch Civil Code). In this grey area, we encounter complex interactions: a private contractual obligation cannot be executed without a public law permit, while public law decisions sometimes create civil liabilities. When financial mismanagement, fraud, bribery, money laundering, corruption, or violations of international sanctions occur at these intersections, it disrupts not only individual projects but the entire trust in institutional and market-based systems.
Financial Mismanagement
Financial mismanagement in PPP structures or public-private contracts undermines the creditworthiness of both governments and market parties. For instance, when a municipality fails to allocate sufficient funds in a cooperation agreement for the maintenance of green energy infrastructure or creates incomplete budgets for the remediation and redevelopment of industrial areas. Parties that base their plans on these budgets are later faced with unpleasant surprises: successive invoices, additional charges, or increased guarantee requirements. Banks and institutional investors charge additional risk premiums, halting the financing of sustainable housing and restructuring projects. Furthermore, inadequate accountability can lead to internal and external audits, suspension of payments, and contractual arbitrations over failure costs, resulting in long-term reputational damage for the municipalities involved and private consortium partners.
Fraud
Fraud at the intersection of public and private law often manifests through the intentional falsification of research data or contractual performance to bypass public law requirements. A consultancy firm may manipulate soil or water quality data in both civil pre-development agreements and public environmental impact assessments (EIAs) to expedite permits and reduce investment costs. Once such malpractices are exposed—through requests under the Dutch Open Government Act (WOO), reports to the Dutch Environment and Transport Inspectorate, or internal whistleblowers—permits are revoked, contracts are dissolved, and civil obligations are re-evaluated. Legal uncertainty blocks further project execution, leading to damage claims from competing market parties and local residents, who seek redress through civil lawsuits and administrative appeals.
Bribery
Bribery in concession and cooperation projects undermines the integrity of both administrative decisions and private law contracts. This can occur when companies disguise “consulting” or “project management” costs as a cover for bribes to officials or committee members. In public planning, bribery transactions result in zoning plan changes or permits being granted outside regular evaluation criteria, either expedited or relaxed. From a private law perspective, this creates an uneven playing field in tenders, forcing competitors into lawsuits due to violations of tendering rules and unfair competition. The discovery of bribery leads to criminal investigations, nullification of concession and PPP contracts, and the revocation of exemptions, which can lead to years of stagnation and billions in claims.
Money Laundering
Money laundering in environmental and planning projects often nests in the complex financial flows of public-private infrastructure and redevelopment contracts. Criminal networks invest illegal profits in real estate or energy projects through affiliated companies, artificially inflating remediation or maintenance costs. Since municipalities or project agencies may not always monitor irregular invoices or unexplained price hikes, illegal capital can quietly mingle with formally legitimate collaborations. Signals from the Financial Intelligence Unit (FIU-NL) or the Fiscal Information and Investigation Service (FIOD) then lead to account freezes and the suspension of contractual payments. The consequence is that construction sites are left idle, contractors go bankrupt, and public funds are blocked, causing recovery and investment programs to fizzle out and undermining public trust in sustainable area development.
Corruption
Corruption in the grey area between public and private law arises when mutual conflicts of interest are structurally embedded in decision-making and contracting practices. Examples include municipal administrations granting concessions in exchange for donations or secondary business interests, or developers preferentially receiving building plots through political connections. This leads to the systematic favoring of certain market players and disrupts the free market dynamics that private law tendering rules are meant to safeguard. When exposed through parliamentary inquiries or oversight reports, intervention by ministers or provincial commissioners follows, leading to a revision of all involved specifications, restoration of tender procedures, and the establishment of new integrity protocols. These interventions halt projects for extended periods and damage the reputation of both public and private actors.
Violation of International Sanctions
In public-private energy and infrastructure projects, compliance with international sanctions plays a crucial role. When a consortium, under the Environmental Management Act, for example, engages foreign financiers or suppliers listed on EU or UN sanction lists, this can lead to immediate freezing of subsidies and permits. Both the public permit authorities and private contract parties risk heavy fines from the Ministry of Finance and exclusion from future European funds. Such violations disrupt ongoing cooperation agreements, force renegotiations or contract dissolutions, and jeopardize the status of the Netherlands as a reliable partner in sustainable area development. International partners may decide to withdraw, causing crucial projects in energy transition and infrastructure to come to a sudden halt.
