In a shareholder dispute, the first question is which legal problem needs solving, rather than how to remove the other person. Is decision-making blocked, is information missing or do you want to separate? Collect the articles of association, shareholder agreements and decisions, and identify the business decision that cannot wait. A business lawyer can assess your role, the available route and possible urgent measures. This guide concerns Dutch private and public limited companies, known as BVs and NVs. A dispute between partners in a general partnership requires a different assessment.
Sources (3)
On this page
1. Separate your roles as shareholder, director and employee
One person may own shares, manage the company and work under an employment contract. A decision affecting one role does not automatically resolve the problems in another. Prepare an overview of the companies involved, ownership percentages, directorships and working arrangements. State whether a holding company owns the shares, because the individual and the shareholder entity are not necessarily the same party.
Next explain your objective: business continuity, a workable management arrangement, access to information or an exit agreement. Simply saying the other person must leave does not establish whether you mean the management position, share ownership or both. This distinction helps prevent the first consultation from focusing on a measure that does not address the real problem.
If you also have an ordinary employment relationship and its termination is at issue, consider the separate employment-law dismissal question. Special rules apply to a statutory director and require specific advice; the general dismissal guide is not sufficient for that situation.
2. Read the articles and shareholder agreements together
Bring the current articles of association and all signed shareholder agreements. Identify provisions on voting, information, transfers, valuation and disputes. Check for amendments and separate arrangements. A draft that was never signed should remain clearly identified as a draft in the file, rather than being presented as the binding agreement between everyone involved.
A business argument does not prove that a specific transfer provision has already been triggered. For each clause, identify the event on which you rely and the correspondence about it. Have the relationship between the articles, shareholder agreements and other contracts assessed. Reading one isolated sentence without the surrounding documents may overlook an important qualification or different obligation.
3. Record the actual effects on the business
A personal conflict becomes more concrete for legal assessment when you show what has stopped working in the company. Identify the budget that has not been approved, the payment being disputed or the information that has not been supplied. Add agendas, decisions, correspondence and relevant financial records. Distinguish verified facts from assumptions and personal opinions.
Prepare a timeline showing the decision needed, the people involved and the consequences of failing to decide. Preserve documents lawfully and without altering them. Do not block access, contact customers or move company records without authority. First discuss which protective measure is necessary and who has the power to take it.
4. Identify a targeted interim or lasting solution
Decide what arrangement the business needs now and which disagreement can be resolved later. A temporary information-sharing or consultation protocol may create room for exit negotiations. If a buyout is proposed, valuation, payment and the practical ability to transfer the shares also need discussion. An agreement on the headline price alone may leave the transaction unresolved.
Put a proposal in writing without inadvertently giving up other claims. Mediation can help where both sides are willing to work on a joint solution. Your own lawyer can assess your position alongside those discussions. Make clear whether an adviser represents one party or has been jointly appointed; these roles should not be assumed to be interchangeable.
5. Distinguish an inquiry from a shareholder exit procedure
Proceedings before the Enterprise Chamber, the Ondernemingskamer, serve different purposes and have different conditions. An inquiry concerns investigation of the policy and affairs of a legal entity. The statutory shareholder dispute procedure may, subject to its conditions, concern compulsory expulsion or withdrawal. A disagreement between owners does not automatically satisfy the requirements for either request.
Since 1 January 2025, expulsion or withdrawal requests may be brought at first instance by petition to the Enterprise Chamber. Older explanations that invariably refer this route to the district court may therefore be outdated. Ask a lawyer to check the current rules, your eligibility and the relief sought before choosing proceedings. This guide does not assume that every shareholder qualifies.
6. Specify which decision is urgent
An unworkable relationship often feels urgent, but choosing a measure also requires identifying what cannot wait. Describe a particular payment deadline, announced meeting or proposed transaction. Attach the relevant document and explain the consequence you fear. Concrete dates and evidence allow an adviser to distinguish immediate business risks from the wider relationship dispute.
The lawyer can then assess whether an immediate measure, another procedure or a focused letter is appropriate. Ask what an interim measure does and does not resolve. Protecting the company’s continuity does not automatically determine who eventually receives the shares or the price to be paid for them. Keep the immediate request separate from the final exit objective.
7. Fictional example: two owners and a funding deadlock
Suppose two holding companies each own half of an operating company. Their directors disagree about additional funding. One wants to sell, while the other first wants the records investigated. A letter merely offering a low purchase price addresses neither the information issue nor the immediate financing problem. These are separate questions even though they arise from the same conflict.
Useful preparation means collecting the funding documents, existing agreements and specific requests for information. The parties can then discuss temporary protection for the company and whether a supported exit arrangement is possible. This fictional example is not an account of an actual client case and does not predict how a court would decide.
8. Checklist for your business lawyer
Bring a short summary of the group structure, the central dispute and your desired solution. Identify any adviser already instructed by the other side and promises you have made yourself. Ask for a staged engagement: assess your position and urgency first, then develop the chosen route.
- Current articles, shareholder register and signed shareholder agreement.
- Group chart showing holding companies, ownership percentages and directorships.
- Relevant agendas, minutes, decisions and written objections.
- Financial records and a timeline of actual effects on the company.
- Exit proposals, valuation agreements and documents establishing an urgent date.
Frequently asked questions
Can I remove my fellow shareholder myself?
Wanting an exit does not create a power to compel a share transfer. Contractual provisions and statutory requirements need assessment. Removal as director and transfer of shares are separate issues.
Is an inquiry always the right route?
No. Investigation of company policy and a compulsory exit have different purposes and conditions. Have your specific problem and requested relief assessed.
Do expulsion and withdrawal still go to the district court?
The Enterprise Chamber states that, since 1 January 2025, these first-instance requests may be submitted to it by petition. Ask your lawyer to check the applicable route and any particular circumstances.
Can one lawyer represent both of us?
First establish who the client is and whether joint representation is possible where interests conflict. A mediator, jointly appointed expert and your own lawyer perform different roles.
Sources
These sources relate to this page. For a specific case, check current rules and your own documents.
- Rechtspraak — Ondernemingskamer, werkwijze en reglementen Accessed: 2026-10-23
- Rechtspraak — jaarverslag Ondernemingskamer 2025 Accessed: 2026-10-23
- Ondernemersplein — zakelijke conflicten zonder rechter Accessed: 2026-10-23
Legal review
Not legally reviewed yetThis version has not been reviewed by a lawyer or legal professional. Checking sources or editing text is not legal approval.
Editorial team Business law in the Netherlands
We connect explanations to sources and record targeted changes. Legal review is attributed only to the actual reviewed version, with a real reviewer, date and scope. Human legal review of these articles remains open.

Ricardo van der Spoel
Editorial responsibility · Editorial organisation and technology