What is the starting point for our explanation?
Our explanation starts with questions from clients, contractors, subcontractors and other parties involved in construction projects. A construction defect, delay or difference regarding additional work can halt a project and cause high costs. We connect concepts and procedures to practical questions, such as: What has been agreed? When was the problem reported? Who carried out which work?
We want to explain legal concepts without leaving out meaningful exceptions. The answer may depend on the agreements, the facts, previous steps and current rules. Where personal assessment remains necessary, this must be recognisable.
What role do sources play?
For legal information, the applicable legislation, case law and information from competent authorities are important starting points. We refer to these sources where appropriate. A source reference makes a text more verifiable; it is not in itself a guarantee that every conclusion is correct or up to date.
A statement is about a specific matter. We want to distinguish between the decision, the facts of that case, and our explanation for a broader question. A date of a statement is not a publication date of our article.
Editing and legal review
The editorial page describes who works on our information. Editorial maintenance and legal approval are different roles. A verified professional role alone does not mean that someone has reviewed every article.
A rating belongs to the content version that was actually rated. Where such assessment is lacking, an editorial mention should not give the impression of legal approval. A name or office in a statement also has a different meaning than a legal assessment of our explanation.
How do you report an error or ambiguity?
Send the link and the specific passage to redactie@jurismedia.nl. Explain what you think is incorrect, outdated or unclear. If possible, include a relevant source. A report without a legal source can also be useful, for example if an explanation is difficult to understand.
We assess the report based on the content and sources. A correction request is not an automatic change. For a broader complaint, you can use the Report complaints.
What can you find yourself?
On the page about our editorial staff and working methods you can read about the information provision. For a correction request we need the link, the language and the intended passage. We do not claim a complete public review archive for all articles here.
Also read our policy on AI usage and translations and Advertising and white label.