Since 2 July 2016, Belgian law offers creditors a second route for undisputed debts between businesses: the so-called IOS procedure, in which a bailiff recovers the debt without a judge ever seeing the file. It was designed to relieve the courts, and it does. What it does not do — and this surprises foreign creditors — is automatically give you more money, or your money sooner.
What the administrative route caps
In the IOS procedure, interest and the contractual compensation clause together are capped at 10% of the principal, and interest stops running from the moment the formal demand is served. Whatever your terms and conditions provide, that ceiling applies. On a small claim that is often perfectly acceptable. On a large one, or one that has been outstanding for a long time, you are leaving money on the table.
What the judicial route allows
Before a court, that ceiling disappears. The statutory late-payment interest for commercial transactions — currently 10.5% — runs in full, alongside the compensation clause your own terms provide for. On a claim that has been outstanding for a while, the interest alone is the difference.
The difference, on a concrete claim
Take an invoice of €8,000 that has been unpaid for eight months, with a compensation clause of 10% in your terms and conditions.
| Recoverable from the debtor | Administrative (IOS) | Judicial |
|---|---|---|
| Compensation clause (10%) | €800 | €800 |
| Late-payment interest (10.5%, 8 months) | within the cap | €560 |
| On top of the principal | max. €800 | €1,360 |
The same debtor, the same invoice, the same eight months. Because the administrative route caps interest and the compensation clause together at 10% of the principal, the interest that accrued while you were waiting is simply absorbed. The longer the invoice has been running, the more that ceiling costs you.
Faster? Sometimes — but the title you obtain is fragile
The usual argument for the administrative route is speed, and it is not baseless: in a file where nothing goes wrong, the IOS route can indeed produce an enforceable title sooner. Both routes do, however, require more or less the same waiting period before enforcement can begin.
The route also has more steps than the headline suggests. Your debtor keeps a final opportunity to object, and that window closes only when the official record of non-contestation is served; a last period runs after that. In our experience the complete route takes some three to four months, and only at the end of it is the title definitive. Up to that point it remains vulnerable to a late objection — which is precisely what a debtor with an adviser will use. In a straightforward, smaller file the administrative route is the sensible choice; in a substantial one, the robustness of the title matters as much as the calendar.
The courts have confirmed that the choice is yours
The question arose almost as soon as the administrative procedure entered into force: could a creditor with an undisputed claim be pushed towards that route, and be denied the costs of going to court instead? It was settled quickly. The Court of Appeal of Ghent ruled on 24 April 2017 (A.R. 2016/AR/2008), in a case argued by our own firm — the first appellate ruling to confirm the creditor's right to choose. The statute says the administrative procedure can be used, not that it must be, and a creditor who prefers the judicial route for sound commercial reasons — higher recoverable interest, a more robust title — keeps the right to the costs of that route. The Court of Cassation confirmed the same principle on 12 October 2017 (C.17.0129).
For your file, that means the route is chosen on the merits of your claim rather than imposed on you.
What this means for your file
Three things follow from it. First, the route should be chosen per file, not by habit — the size of the claim, how long it has been running and the solvency of the debtor all move the answer. Second, your terms and conditions determine the ceiling on the judicial side, so a compensation clause worth having is worth writing. Third, whichever road you take, it is only worth taking against a debtor who can actually pay. That is what our SolvaClear screening establishes before any cost is incurred: what the company owns, what other creditors have already seized, and whether proceedings are worth it.
Which route fits your invoice? Upload it. Our firm assesses the claim and takes the route that recovers the maximum in the shortest possible time.