Support ADM!

ADM is under a serious threat of eviction. Support us to help us fight our legal battles, court cases and continue campaigning. 





Members of the ADM community, in collaboration with 7 lawyers, have already taken on more than 20 court cases (as well as various other procedures and research projects) that have cost more than €50,000. The costs were paid by ADM-ers and by a few benefits. These cases concern issues such as human rights, environmental protection and the investigation of corruption. There are still many cases to come, and right now is a critical moment for the future of ADM. To help us cover the costs of the fight and keep our culture and community alive, we're asking for donations. Any amount, however small, is very welcome and hugely appreciated. Your donations will be used to cover the legal costs, research, and campaigns needed to sustain the ADM and everything it stands for in the future. ADM is 100% transparent on how your donations will be spent.

ADMers hebben in samenwerking met 7 advocaten al meer dan 20 rechtzaken gevoerd (en vele andere procedures en onderzoeken) die al meer dan 50,000 euro hebben gekost. De kosten werden door ADMers via benefiet evenementen betaald. De zaken gingen om mensenrechten, milieubescherming en corruptie-onderzoek. Er lopen nog steeds zaken en het is nu een kritiek moment voor de toekomst van de ADM. Om de kosten te dekken en onze cultuur en gemeenschap in leven te houden vragen we om donaties. Ieder bedrag, hoe bescheiden ook, is zeer welkom en wordt zeer gewaardeerd. Donaties gaan naar juridische kosten, onderzoek en campagnes die nodig zijn om de ADM en alles waar de ADM voor staat voor de toekomst te behouden. ADM is 100 % transparant over waar de donaties aan worden besteed.



Bezwaar en Beroep ontheffing flora-en fauna wet / Objection and Appeal against exception from flora and fauna law

ADM versus National Authority for Business (Rijksdienst voor Ondernemers, R.V.O)
Costs: €1,000

Hoger Beroep 'bezwaar niet handhaven' bestuursrecht / Higher Appeal 'objection not enforcing' administrative law
City of Amsterdam / ADM versus Chidda Vastgoed B.V. & Amstelimmo B.V.
ADM appealed as a third party
Costs: €1,800

Hoger Beroep n.a.v. Kort Geding 'dwangsommen' / Higher Appeal upon Short procedure 'penalties'


ADM versus Chidda Vastgoed B.V. & Amstelimmo B.V.
By now Chidda took more than €36,000

Costs: €1,500

2017-08-08 verdict: ADM wins
Chidda has to pay back everything they took

Hoger Beroep bodemprocedure / Higher Appeal in-depth procedure


Chidda Vastgoed B.V. & Amstelimmo B.V vs ADM

Costs: €3,500

Chidda wins - ADMers have to leave six months after Koole gets work permits

Kort Geding 'dwangsommen' / Short procedure 'penalties'


ADM versus Chidda Vastgoed B.V. & Amstelimmo B.V.

In December 2016 Chidda's bailiff started confiscating money from 4 ADMers' income. So far Chidda had only made a threat to claim the penalties every half year, but never started taking the money.

Costs: €1,800

2017-03-28 verdict: Chidda wins
Despite Chidda never even came to ADM in the period for which they claim the penalties

Beroep 'bezwaar niet handhaven' bestuursrecht / Appeal 'objection not enforcing' administrative law


Chidda Vastgoed B.V. & Amstelimmo B.V. versus municipality

Despite this case being between Chidda and the municipality, ADM was also represented by a lawyer and given time to speak.

Costs: €3,000

2017-04-11 verdict postponed
2017-05-23 verdict postponed

2017-06-28 verdict: Chidda wins

The municipality is ordered to make a different decision concerning enforcing the zoning plan. It means they can no longer stick to not enforcing and have to write up a plan on how and when to enforce the zoning plan. (This means eviction of all but 5 businesses)  

Cassatie 'executiegeschil toegang' & 'Hoger Beroep n.a.v. Kort Geding ontruiming' / Supreme Court 'access interpretation case' & 'Higher Appeal upon short procedure eviction'

ADM versus Chidda Vastgoed B.V. & Amstelimmo B.V.

ADM appeals to the Supreme Court in a merged case since the verdict on the 22nd of December 2015 is an interpretation of the verdict of the 13th of July or at least the part about entrance, which is upheld in the appeal on the 4th of April 2016.

Costs: €5,500

2017-03-07 no verdict, case dismissed

Hoger Beroep n.a.v Kort Geding 'vergunning XIX verjaardag festival' / Higher Appeal upon 'short procedure permit XIX birthday festival'

Chidda Vastgoed B.V. & Amstelimmo B.V. versus ADM

Against all future festivals and events Chidda appeals against the verdict previous.
No physical hearing takes place.

Costs: €1,800

2017-03-05 verdict: ADM wins
In the verdict ADM is noted as the possessor of the property (although possession does not always imply ownership)


Kort Geding 'vergunning XIX verjaardag festival' / Short procedure 'permit XIX birthday festival'

Chidda Vastgoed B.V. & Amstelimmo B.V. versus ADM

With most of the artists, musicians and volunteers already up and running, a few ADM-ers go to court to defend the yearly festival, (hopefully) held for the 19th time.

Costs: €1,500

2016-10-05 verdict: ADM wins
So the next day the festival opened

Hoger Beroep n.a.v. 'Kort Geding ontruiming' / Higher Appeal upon 'short procedure eviction'

Chidda Vastgoed B.V. & Amstelimmo B.V. versus ADM

This is where Chidda claims ADM prevented them in executing felling works. On the table lies a glossy brochure with pictures of a demolition wharf, however Koole could not present the court with any calculations on the economical viability of their plan.

Costs: €3,500

2016-06-21 verdict: ADM wins
No eviction is ordered.
The court finds the presented plans unconvincing and points out the need for appeal only rises when there are new facts or changes to consider

Bezwaar 'bomenkap vergunning'  / Appeal 'tree-felling permit'

ADM versus the Mayor and Executive Board

2016-02-24 Chidda starts to fell the trees, unfortunately we received a message from the R.V.O. (the authority in these matters), in which they informed us that they see no reason to stop Chidda from felling the trees.

Costs: €600

Nice quote from an ADM-er:

Eerst een rechter die het over een rugschildpad heeft, die luistert naar een ecoloog die zegt dat in een gebied met 450 bomen geen muizen leven. Dat ransuilen niet van bos houden. Er geen nesten van ransuilen zijn gevonden. Natuurlijk niet want die maken geen nesten, die zitten in oude kraaien- of eksternesten (krakers). En er ook geen beschermde roofvogels of andere beschermde soorten zijn...

Dan hebben we nu ook nog te maken met een wethouder (Erik van den Burg, VVD) die er wel om kan lachen en het gepast vindt om er grapjes over te maken dat er vierkant gelogen is als het bewijs keihard geleverd wordt.

Onderzoek natuurwaarden / Research about the value of the nature

spring 2016

Research to prove value of nature at ADM terrain (animal/plant species cataloging)

Costs: €4,000

Outcome: several protected species catalogued

Verzoek VoVo (Voorlopige Voorziening) 'bomenkap vergunning' / Request for interim measure 'tree felling permit'

ADM versus the Mayor and Executive Board

On 2015-11-20 Chidda received a permit to fell 470 trees, but according to Arda (ecological bureau) inadequate research was done for the bats, birds and toads residing there. No plans for the plot presented themselves when Chidda was asked, only a summary of possibilities. This case was held to convince the court to put the permit on hold until the outcome of the next case: the appeal against the permit...

Costs: €600

2016-02-11 verdict: Chidda wins
Interim measure not granted


Hoger Beroep 'executiegeschil toegang' / Higher Appeal 'interpretation of verdict access'

ADM versus Chidda Vastgoed B.V. & Amstelimmo B.V.

ADM cannot believe the court could have meant (in the verdict 13th of July 2015 about access for visits) to allow Chidda entrance to every private space at any given time to execute any kind of works, so ADM asks the judges in higher appeal to restrict this interpretation somewhat so it is again in accordance with the basic human rights to privacy

Costs: €1,200

2015-12-22 verdict: Chidda wins
The court repeats the previous verdict

Bezwaar 'niet handhaven' / Appeal 'not enforcing'

Chidda Vastgoed B.V. & Amstelimmo B.V. versus municipality of Amsterdam

Chidda objects against the municipality's decision not to enforce the zoning plan of the ADM terrain.
To enforce the zoning plan (bestemmingsplan handhaven) would mean to evict the inhabitants.

Costs: €1,000

2016-03-21 decision: City council rejects objections of Chidda (ADM wins)
Municipality decides to stick to previous decision to make an exception because the plans presented by Koole are not convincing them of immediate use after eviction. Amsterdam makes a point of not evicting for vacancy. The research needed to apply for the right permits (ontheffingen) will take at least one more year, for the bats (kleine dwergvleermuis) have to be recorded in several seasons

Asbest onderzoek / Asbestos inventory


Chidda tried to ban ADM birthday festival due to alleged asbestos contamination. ADM had to contract external company to conduct asbestos inventory and asbestos safety assessment.

Costs: €6,000

Result: ADM is assessed safe and festival happens

Bodemprocedure 'ontruiming' / In-depth procedure 'eviction'

Chidda Vastgoed B.V. & Amstelimmo B.V. versus ADM

Chidda demands eviction for the same plans presented in the case on 29th of June.

Our lawyers pointed out that the size of ships Koole Maritime B.V. wants to store and repair (as mentioned in their publicity folder) can't pass the Velsertunnel, in the Noordzee-kanaal because of depth restrictions. Chidda's lawyer replied in court that the Velsertunnel wasn't a problem at all, since it is situated to the east of the ADM along the Noordzee-kanaal (NOT!)

Costs: €3,500

2016-01-06 verdict: ADM wins
The court finds the plans unrealistic

Executiegeschil 'toegang' / Interpretation case 'access'

ADM versus Chidda Vastgoed B.V & Amstelimmo B.V.

Residents of ADM ask the court how far Chidda can take the right to visit, since Chidda wants to use this right to do all sorts of works around their homes and in their workspaces.

Costs: €1,200

2015-11-30 verdict: Chidda wins
The court decides Chidda can do anything at all in any space at all, in relation to development of their plans. This leads to Chidda now demanding 2 months worth of penalties at €500 per day (€28,000 total + bailiff costs) for not gaining entrance to the terrain

Kort Geding 'ontruiming' / Short procedure 'eviction'


Chidda Vastgoed B.V & Amstelimmo B.V. versus 114 residents of ADM + some people living next to ADM

Chidda demands total eviction per 1st of August based on an unsigned contract with Koole Maritime B.V. for the rental of a part of the terrain.

Costs: €3,500

Within this procedure ADM had to prove overall un-usability of the warehouse (ADM loods) by an architectural research conducted by a certified company.

Costs: €2,500

2015-07-13 verdict: ADM wins

The court decides there is no immediate need for eviction, the plans presented by Chidda are not sufficiently developed to suggest immediate use

Kort Geding 'toegang' / Short procedure 'access'


Chidda Vastgoed B.V & Amstelimmo B.V. versus 4 residents of ADM

Chidda demands access to show terrain to possible buyers, but only summons 4 residents to court.

Costs: €1,500

2015-03-25 verdict: Chidda is allowed to visit the ADM terrain if they give a 24hour notice before