Ruben Wiegerink
T+31 70 31 31 076
F+31 70 31 31 060
M+31 6 152 646 07

VCARD LinkedIn Rechtsgebiedenregister


Suzanne van den Berg
T +31 70 31 31 074

Ruben Wiegerink


Ruben combines many areas of expertise in his practice: he is both adviser and litigator in expropriation law, government private law, state aid law, and tax law. His know-how includes experience in State as well as local government taxes. Ruben is also admitted to the Dutch Supreme Court Bar Association.

Ruben’s Supreme Court experience is extensive. Before joining Van der Feltz, he was with Pels Rijcken for nine years, where his practice included Supreme Court litigation. Pels Rijcken is the “State Advocate”, i.e. the law firm representing the Dutch government. And before that, with the Supreme Court’s research centre for seven years.

Ruben enjoys being a sparring partner with fellow lawyers when they are considering Supreme Court appeals. He is convinced that it is essential to review all interests thoroughly and to determine the desired final outcome. Ruben is proactive when advising on the chances of success of a possible Supreme Court appeal. He also assesses the probability of a favourable outcome in the event the Supreme Court remits the case, and enables his clients to properly assess whether or not to lodge an appeal at the Supreme Court.

Ruben has an eye for detail, understands complex instructions and structures, and is always committed to maintaining the quality of his work at a high level. He works well within tight deadlines. In short, excellent legal service is second nature to him.

Industry focus

  • Government
  • Real Estate

Areas of expertise

  • Constitutional and Administrative Law
  • Expropriation
  • Liability and damages
  • Procurement and State Aid
  • Real Estate
  • Supreme Court litigation
  • Tax law


To illustrate Ruben’s practice:

  • Conducting a principal cassation procedure on a private-public cooperation between a project developer and a municipality. This concerned the explanation of an agreement about the construction of a residential area;
  • Proceeding in several instances on the levying of distribution tax on underground pipelines by a municipality. This included issues such as whether private law permission had been given for the presence of the pipelines, as a result of which the levy could not be imposed. The question was also answered whether the tariffs applied could be justified;
  • Proceedings for a municipality about the question of whether the municipality acted unlawfully by indicating, during a conversation with an entrepreneur, that the entrepreneur had to take measures, because otherwise his company had to be discontinued. This case dealt with all sorts of aspects of government liability and the overlapping with administrative law;
  • Advising on whether the municipal purchase of real estate above the market value would constitute impermissible state aid. Among other things, the various possibilities available to the municipality to prevent state support, including an appeal to the de minimis regulation, were discussed;
  • Conducting a procedure for De Nederlandsche Bank regarding levies with regard to financial supervision. The main question was whether the Financial Supervision Act (Wbft) and the implementing regulations based on it, provided for an authorization to impose taxes. In addition, aspects of European law were involved. The case led to the principal decision of the CbB of 18 September 2018, ECLI:NL:CBB:2018:475. The contested judgment was overturned.


  • Member of the Association of Dutch Supreme Court Civil Litigators
  • Member of the Association of Dutch Expropriation Lawyers
  • Member of the Dutch Expropriation Law Association
  • Member of the Dutch Association of Tax Law Specialists and Litigators
  • Member of the Association for Taxation Studies


Select year:
Name Title Published in
Ruben Wiegerink Noot bij Gerechtshof Amsterdam 6 oktober 2020, ECLI:NL:GHAMS:2020:2648 (Doorzendplicht niet van toepassing, omdat bezwaarschrift bij algemeen gemeentelijk mailadres is ingediend) Belastingblad (BB) januari afl. 1 BB 2021/13
Ruben Wiegerink Noot bij Nationale ombudsman 18 september 2020, nr. 202002332 Onduidelijk of bij het kwijtscheldingsbesluit de Leidraad Invordering juist is toegepast. Belastingblad (BB), november, afl. 23, BB 2020/467
Ruben Wiegerink Dubbele redelijkheidstoets proceskostenvergoeding. Geen vergoeding proceskosten bezwaarfase. Belastingblad (BB), oktober, afl. 20, BB 2020/413
Ruben Wiegerink Noot bij Rb. Noord-Holland 28 april 2020, ECLI:NL:RBNNE:2020:1728 (Heffing precariobelasting is niet strijdig met het gelijkheidsbeginsel. Woonschip en parkeergarage zijn geen gelijke gevallen) Belastingblad (BB), augustus, afl. 17, BB 2020/364
Indira Stolze, Ruben Wiegerink Misbruik van recht: dwangsommenjagers, querulanten en no pay no cure-dienstverleners binnen het lokale belastingrecht Belastingblad (BB), augustus, afl. 16, BB 2020/335
Ruben Wiegerink Verzoek dwangsom wegens niet tijdig beslissen op administratief beroep kwijtschelding; burgerlijke rechter bevoegd Belastingblad (BB), juli, afl. 15, BB 2020/331
Ruben Wiegerink Noot bij Hof 's-Hertogenbosch ECLI:NL:GHSHE:2020:1119 (Legesheffing in verband werkzaamheden aan glasvezelnetwerk voldoet aan criteria art. 13 Machtigingsrichtlijn) Belastingblad (BB), afl. 13, BB 2020/284
Indira Stolze, Ruben Wiegerink Misbruik van recht: dwangsommenjagers, querulanten en no pay no cure-dienstverleners binnen het lokale belastingrecht Belastingblad (BB), augustus, afl. 16, BB 2020/335
Ruben Wiegerink Noot bij Hof 's-Hertogenbosch ECLI:NL:GHSHE:2020:241 (Er is geen sprake van een (ontoelaatbare) tweede primitieve aanslag maar van een navorderingsaanslag Belastingblad, april 2020, afl. 9, (BB) 2020/200
Ruben Wiegerink Kroniek jurisprudentie belastingen lagere overheden 2019 Belastingblad (BB), maart 2020, Afl. 6 & 7, BB 2020/120 & 2020/142
Ruben Wiegerink Noot bij Rechtbank Overijssel 20 december 2019, ECLI:NL:RBOVE:2019:4827 (Aanvullend ten onrechte pas kort voor de zitting ingediend. Strijd met goede procesorde.) Belastingblad (BB), maart, afl. 7, BB 2020/149
Ruben Wiegerink Noot bij Hof Arnhem-Leeuwarden 24 december 2019, ECLI:NL:GHARL:2019:11011 (Aanmaningskosten niet verschuldigd ondanks dat heffingsambtenaar aanslagen via Berichtenbox MijnOverheid mocht verzenden) Belastingblad (BB), februari afl. 6, BB 2020/138
Ruben Wiegerink Noot bij Hof ’s-Hertogenbosch 3 oktober 2019, ECLI:NL:GHSHE:2019:3627 Belastingblad (BB), afl. 3, BB 2020/51
Ruben Wiegerink Noot bij Rechtbank Amsterdam 9 oktober 2019, ECLI:NL:RBAMS:2019:7409 Belastingblad (BB), januari, afl. 2, BB 2020/38
Ruben Wiegerink Noot bij Rechtbank Gelderland 30 oktober 2019, ECLLI:NL:RBGEL:2019:4828 Belastingblad (BB), januari, afl. 2, BB 2020/36