Already an account? Log in

    Try Payroll Rendement

    With 13 published issues in a calendar year Payroll Rendement offers the most up to date answers to your professional questions with news, themes and articles.

    Subscribe to Payroll Rendement for the next three months for only € 3, excluding VAT (normal price is € 99 per year). This offer applies to a business trial subscription, valid until cancellation.

    Fill out the form below and subscribe

    Are you interested in similar English publications? Rendement also offers (about Dutch HRM regulations), (about Dutch tax regulations) and (about Dutch financial SME-news). Try these publications for three months each for € 3, excluding VAT. Normal price is €99 per year.

    Promo code (when available)

    We ask you to agree to our General Terms and Conditions and read our Privacy Policy.

    When clicking on subscribe, you automatically give permission to receive the newsletter and offers, with which we inform you about relevant products and services of Rendement Uitgeverij BV. If you do not want this, please contact us via You can also withdraw the consent at any time by clicking on the unsubscribe link at the bottom of each email.

    Altering the end date of a contract may result in a new contract

    In some instances, altering the end date of a temporary employment contract while that contract is in effect might be the same as entering into a new contract. As a result, the respective employee may (unintentionally) be given a permanent contract. This situation emerged in a recent case handled by the Court of The Hague.

    In a row

    The case in question concerned an employee whose temporary employment contract was extended twice. The second contract extension initially pertained to a period between February 15, 2018 and August 15, 2018. However, on July 2, 2018 the employer decided to alter the given end date to August 14, 2020. The ruling by the Court of The Hague was in line with a previous verdict by the Court of Justice of the European Union, which had ruled that an alteration in the end date of a temporary contract can be equated to entering into a new contract. Under Dutch law, an employee may only be given a maximum of three temporary contracts in a row. After this, (s)he must be given a permanent contract. Since in the case handled by the Court of The Hague the temporary contract had already been extended twice, this meant the employee in question had already had the maximum of three temporary contracts in a row. The court thus ruled that by altering the end date and thereby extending the contract a third time (i.e. the fourth contract of the respective employee), the employer had unintentionally entered into a permanent contract with the employee.

    Court of The Hague, June 30, 2021; ECLI (abridged): 7032

    Share this article on: