WILLEMSTAD – The Court of First Instance of Curaçao has annulled a building permit for a four-unit apartment complex in Jan Thiel after finding that the Minister of Traffic, Transport and Urban Planning failed to properly assess the project against an existing subdivision plan. Despite that ruling, the developer will still be allowed to proceed with the project.
The case concerns a building permit issued on February 17, 2026 for a flat complex containing four residential units. A neighboring property owner challenged the permit, arguing, among other things, that the development violated the Jan Thiel subdivision plan, which stipulated a maximum of one house per parcel.
The court agreed that the minister had made an error.
According to the June 17 judgment, the building parcel falls within the “Verkavelingsplan Jan Thiel,” a subdivision plan approved by the Executive Council in 1963. The minister had argued that the building application did not have to be tested against those older development provisions.
The court rejected that position.
It ruled that the minister was required under Curaçao’s Building and Housing Ordinance to determine whether the proposed development complied with the approved subdivision plan. Because that assessment was not carried out, the building permit was legally defective.
However, the ruling produced an unusual outcome.
Although the court declared the neighbor’s appeal well-founded and annulled the permit, it simultaneously decided that the legal consequences of the permit should remain in effect. In practical terms, this means the developer retains a valid legal basis to construct the four-unit complex.
The reason lies in the relationship between the old Jan Thiel subdivision rules and Curaçao’s later Island Development Plan, known as the EOP.
The court found that the subdivision provision allowing only one house per parcel conflicts with the EOP in this particular situation. The property is designated as an urban residential area, where the EOP permits construction of flats.
Under the EOP, a provision contained in an otherwise valid subdivision plan must be set aside when it conflicts with the applicable development provisions of the EOP. The court therefore concluded that the “one house per parcel” restriction could not be applied to stop this development.
The neighbor also argued that the minister should have considered a less intensive alternative, such as allowing only one house or reducing the project to two residential units.
The court rejected that argument as well. Under the building regulations, the minister must rule on the project that was actually submitted and cannot substitute it with a different or modified development plan.
The ruling is significant for property owners and developers in Jan Thiel because it confirms that older approved subdivision plans cannot simply be ignored when building permits are considered. At the same time, individual restrictions contained in those plans may no longer be enforceable when they conflict with the EOP.
The court ordered the government to reimburse the neighboring property owner ANG 150 in court fees. No legal costs were awarded because the plaintiff did not use professional third-party legal representation.
The judgment was issued on June 17 and published on August 19. The parties may appeal to the Joint Court of Justice.