Platform Beeldende Kunst Won trial – Platform BK


Won trial

With the support of many organisations and individuals, including Platform BK, the tenants’ association Arcade has won the lawsuit concerning the hybrid separation of De Key. With this won lawsuit, Amsterdam tenants give Woonstichting De Key and the Minister of Infrastructure and Public Works a sensitive slap on the wrist about a 2016 property separation, in which the housing corporation has transferred, among other things, 600 social housing units and an unknown number of studios from the social real estate portfolio to a commercial branch.


The Court is of the opinion that tenants have a right of consent to far-reaching decisions by housing associations, such as divorces and mergers, and that De Key and the Minister have denied them this right of consent. The Court is also of the opinion that De Key’s method of separating social and commercial real estate – approved by the Authority for Housing Associations on behalf of the Minister – does not meet the requirements of the Act and lacks transparency. The decision of the Authority for Housing Associations has therefore been annulled. The Minister must reassess De Key’s property separation.

The tenants have gone to court in an attempt to indemnify residents and home-seekers against the narrow interpretation of the public housing task by Woonstichting De Key and its hard business operations, which since an amendment of the articles of association has been strongly focused on lucrative target groups such as starters and temporary lease contracts. According to Platform BK and the tenants’ association Arcade, the court’s decision is an important victory for protecting the participation and participation of tenants.

Together with the tenants, Platform BK believes that the privatisation of social housing is an undesirable development. Arcade fears that the ‘Daeb’ branch will be financially harmed by the leakage of social assets to the ‘non-Daeb’ branch. 600 incumbent social tenants and artists suddenly find themselves confronted with a private landlord with a profit motive. Their former rights as tenants of a housing corporation are insufficiently guaranteed, in particular with regard to (annual) rent increases.

About Joram Kraaijeveld