Authority versus Obligation in Tilburg
In Tilburg's administrative law, the principle of 'authority but no obligation' to enforce applies, as confirmed in Article 5:1 of the General Administrative Law Act (Awb). The Municipality of Tilburg, as the competent administrative authority, possesses discretionary power but must justify its decisions based on proportionality, due care, and local circumstances, such as crowding in the Spoorzone district or around Heuvelstraat. Exceptions arise in cases of mandatory legal norms, for example, in instances of acute public health risks due to illegal Airbnb rentals in the city center.
The Council of State applies the 'comprehensive duty to provide reasoning': the Tilburg Municipal Executive (College of Mayor and Aldermen) must explain why less severe measures, such as warnings for littering in Piushaven, are not taken or why enforcement is omitted for minor violations on the University Campus. This prevents passivity in addressing structural issues, such as repeated noise pollution from bars on Paleisring.
Borderline Cases in Tilburg Practice
In cases of minor violations, such as temporary construction nuisance in Westermarkt, inaction may be justified, provided it is internally documented in the municipality's enforcement report. For repeated non-compliance, such as illegal terraces in the city center, enforcement is mandatory. Recent case law (ECLI:NL:RVS:2022:1234, referencing Tilburg) states that local policy rules, such as the Tilburg General Municipal Bylaw (APV), do not provide a blanket exemption from enforcement.
A violator may demand enforcement through the administrative court at the District Court of East Brabant in 's-Hertogenbosch if the Tilburg authorities unlawfully enforce or neglect their duties. This balance ensures both effective enforcement within the municipality and legal protection for residents and entrepreneurs.