NL
EN
FR
Belgium
Back to articles

Late-filed documents may alter the outcome of the permitting process

December 8, 2025

Permit applications must be handled fairly: applicants for urban and environmental permits may not submit new technical studies or other important documents when the parties concerned are no longer able to review or comment on them in a timely manner. Yet this practice is commonplace, much to the frustration of many applicants and their legal counsels. In a judgment of 23 October 2025, the Council for Permit Disputes (CPD) now puts an end to this.

Late-filed documents may alter the outcome of the permitting process

CPD 23 October 2025 (RvVb-A-2526-0131)

1. Which situation prompted the decision?

A project for the construction of nine single-family homes in an inner area, had previously led to three annulments by the Council for Permit Disputes. In the fourth round, just before the hearing at the Provincial Authority, the applicant submitted an additional noise study and a report on odor nuisance. These very documents ultimately proved decisive for the Provincial Authority to grant a permit.

This caused great dissatisfaction for the appellant, who was unable to examine these new documents in time and felt blindsided. According to the appellant, the Provincial Authority should have investigated whether these late submissions required a new public consultation or should have been submitted again to the provincial planning officer. Aggrieved by this procedure, the appellant lodged an appeal with the Council for Permit Disputes.


2. What did the Council for Permit Disputes rule?

The Council reminded that, although it is possible to submit new documents during an appeal, certain conditions must be met (cf. Article 64 of the Environment Permit Decree). One of these conditions is that the rights of third parties are not infringed, such as the right to defend themselves in a useful and informed manner.

According to the Council, the new studies were by no means incidental. That the appellant only saw them for the first time during the hearing was a step too far for the Council: the public must not be confronted with faits accomplis. Therefore, the permit could not rely on information of which the appellant could not take timely notice, let alone comment on – certainly not without any justification provided by the Provincial Authority. The permit was therefore annulled.


3. Conclusion

The key lesson from this ruling is simple yet fundamental for any permit procedure: transparency and timeliness are not mere formalities, but basic conditions for a fair process. Applicants cannot “fix” their file by suddenly submitting additional studies at the last minute, and permitting authorities may not simply accept such documents.

The Council thus clearly draws a line against the practice of last-minute file corrections to the detriment of appellants against an environment permit. For applicants, this means that essential documents should be submitted in a timely manner, while authorities must ensure that any changes are properly assessed in accordance with Article 64 of the Environment Permit Decree (with justification). This prevents a permit from being annulled at a later stage.


Do not hesitate to contact Andersen’s Real Estate team in Belgium for more information and assistance in proceedings before the Council for Permit Disputes and other administrative courts.
Matias Osorio Olivera (Counsel)

Discover more about this topic?

I am looking for a specialist in

See more articles

EU Inc.: Your Future European Company?

13.05.2026

Andersen in Belgium

EU Inc.: Your Future European Company?

With the EU Inc. proposal, the European Commission is taking an important step towards a more modern and integrated European business environment. The idea is simple, yet ambitious: to create a corporate framework that would coexist alongside existing national company forms and allow businesses to operate across the European Union in a simpler, faster and more digital way.

Read the article »
Pillar Two in Belgium: Filing Deadlines Extended to 30 September 2026

13.05.2026

Tax Law, Andersen in Belgium

Pillar Two in Belgium: Filing Deadlines Extended to 30 September 2026

In October 2021, over 135 jurisdictions agreed, under the OECD/G20 Inclusive Framework on BEPS, to introduce a global minimum effective corporate tax rate of 15%. This framework — commonly referred to as Pillar Two — targets large multinational groups and aims to ensure that their profits are subject to a minimum level of taxation in every jurisdiction where they operate.

Read the article »
Managing VAT Under the VAT Provision Account System: Analysis of the New Procedural Framework

13.05.2026

Tax Law, Andersen in Belgium

Managing VAT Under the VAT Provision Account System: Analysis of the New Procedural Framework

1 May 2026 marked the definitive abolition of the current VAT account, which has now been replaced by the VAT provision account.

Read the article »
From Analysis to Certainty: The Importance of Thorough Due Diligence in M&A Transactions

13.05.2026

Corporate Law and M&A, Andersen in Belgium

From Analysis to Certainty: The Importance of Thorough Due Diligence in M&A Transactions

Literally translated, the term due diligence means “appropriate care”, which already says quite a lot in itself: a thorough and careful preliminary investigation of the company one is considering acquiring (through a share purchase). Or of the company one intends to transfer, because indeed a preliminary investigation may also be carried out on behalf of a seller, although this obviously serves a very different purpose.

Read the article »