Dutch Case Law

Publication date 24-09-2024

These are ten key topics that we observe in Dutch money laundering case law.

1. Objective Indicators of Money Laundering. Dutch case law stresses the importance of identifying objective indicators of money laundering, such as unexplained wealth, irregular financial transactions, or the use of cash in contexts where it is uncommon. Courts use these factors to determine if a transaction or asset may be connected to criminal activity.
2. Unexplained Wealth. A common theme in Dutch money laundering cases is the presence of wealth or assets without a clear legitimate source. If money laundering is suspected, it is up to the accused to provide a plausible explanation for the origin of their wealth. If no valid explanation is offered, courts may infer that the wealth is linked to criminal activities.
3. Use of Legal Entities. Dutch case law frequently examines the use of legal entities, such as shell companies, to obscure the true ownership of assets or funds. Prosecutors and courts closely scrutinize the purposes and activities of these entities to determine if they are being used for money laundering.
4. Cash Transactions. Large or frequent cash transactions are often viewed by Dutch courts as potential indicators of money laundering. Case law emphasizes that the use of cash, particularly in situations where electronic or traceable payments are expected, is a warning sign of illicit activity.
5. Structuring of Transactions. The deliberate structuring of transactions to evade detection—by breaking large amounts into smaller, less conspicuous sums—is a key focus in Dutch money laundering cases. Courts see this practice, often called "smurfing," as a strong indication of attempts to launder money.
6. Financial Investigation Techniques. The Dutch legal system allows for extensive financial investigations to uncover money laundering. Courts support the use of various techniques, including financial analysis, asset tracing, and the review of banking records, to build strong cases against suspected launderers.
7. Concealment of True Ownership. Dutch case law frequently addresses efforts to conceal the beneficial owners of assets. Prosecutors and courts pay close attention to cases where individuals attempt to hide their involvement by using intermediaries, nominees, or complex ownership structures.
8. Professional Money Launderers. Some cases focus on the prosecution of professional money launderers—individuals or organizations specializing in laundering illicit funds for others. Dutch courts take these cases seriously, imposing severe penalties due to the significant threat these actors pose to the financial system.
9. International Cooperation. Dutch case law underscores the importance of international cooperation in money laundering cases, particularly given the global nature of many financial crimes. Courts often work with evidence obtained from foreign jurisdictions and support coordinated efforts with international partners.
10. Effectiveness of Legal Presumptions. Dutch courts employ legal presumptions to streamline money laundering prosecutions. For example, if someone possesses large sums of cash or assets that lack an obvious legitimate source, the suspect is expected to explain their origin. If the suspect fails to provide a statement that is "concrete, verifiable, and not highly improbable," it can be presumed that the assets originate from criminal activity. These presumptions facilitate prosecutions by placing the burden on defendants to demonstrate lawful sources for their funds or assets.