On this page
International students in the Netherlands generally have to obtain at least 50% of the required study credits during each academic year. Falling below this threshold may cause the school to report the student to the IND, placing the student’s residence permit at risk.
However, an important court judgment has changed how universities and universities of applied sciences must assess students whose insufficient progress was caused by continuing personal circumstances.
The same illness, psychological condition or other qualifying circumstance cannot automatically be rejected merely because the student relied on it during an earlier academic year.
The 50% study-progress requirement
Under Articles 6.5 and 6.6 of the Code of Conduct for International Students in Higher Education (Gedragscode internationale student hoger onderwijs), an international student with a residence permit for study must normally obtain at least 50% of the proportional nominal study load for each academic year.
For example, if the nominal study load is 60 ECTS per year, the student must normally obtain at least 30 ECTS.
If the student does not meet this requirement, the educational institution must examine the reason for the insufficient progress. It must assess whether personal circumstances recognised under Article 7.51 of the Dutch Higher Education and Research Act (WHW) and Article 2.1 of the WHW Implementation Decree caused the delay.
Relevant circumstances may include:
-
physical or psychological illness;
-
disability or a chronic medical condition;
-
pregnancy and childbirth;
-
exceptional family circumstances;
-
certain administrative or representative activities;
-
or other personal circumstances recognised under the institution’s regulations.
The student must demonstrate not only that the circumstances existed, but also that they caused or materially contributed to the insufficient study progress.
Under article 6.6 of the Gedragscode (2024), it further specifies that:
“The exemption grounds under the Gedragscode can generally only be used once.”
This provision states that the same personal circumstance may be used only once during the “reference period”: the period in which the student holds a study residence permit at the same educational institution.
However, the Council of State (Raad van State) has since clarified that this restriction cannot be applied as an absolute rule.
What did the Council of State decide?
In its judgment of 16 July 2025, ECLI:NL:RVS:2025:3240, the Council of State considered the case of an international student who had experienced psychological trauma that had been bothering him for years.
The personal circumstances had already been taken into account during one academic year. When the same circumstances continued to affect the student during the following academic year, the university relied on Article 6.6 of the Gedragscode and argued that the same reason could not be accepted again.
The Council of State rejected this automatic approach.
It held that the Gedragscode is not a legislative piece containing generally binding rules. When deciding whether to report a student to the IND, the institution must consider all relevant circumstances and observe the principle of proportionality.
Consequently, personal circumstances that continue into a subsequent academic year cannot be disregarded merely because they were accepted previously. The institution must conduct a new individual assessment.
Can psychological circumstances be accepted twice?
Potentially yes, but there is no special rule stating that psychological circumstances may be accepted exactly twice.
The Council of State case concerned psychological trauma, which may have caused the impression that mental-health circumstances benefit from a specific two-year exception. That is not what the judgment established.
The judgment applies more generally to continuing qualifying personal circumstances, including physical illness, chronic conditions and exceptional family circumstances.
There is also no fixed rule limiting the same circumstance to two academic years. In principle, a circumstance could be considered again in a third academic year if it genuinely continued to have a substantial adverse effect on the student’s progress.
Nevertheless, this is not an automatic exemption. A new assessment must take place every academic year.
What must the educational institution assess?
The institution should consider at least:
-
whether the personal circumstance continued during the relevant academic year;
-
whether it remained sufficiently serious;
-
how and during which periods it affected the student;
-
whether there is a causal connection with the missing credits;
-
whether the student reported the problem in time;
-
what supporting evidence is available;
-
what assistance or treatment the student sought;
-
and whether the student complied with previously agreed study and recovery plans.
The fact that a condition has a recognised medical or psychological name is not by itself sufficient. The evidence should explain how the condition affected the student’s ability to attend classes, complete assignments, sit examinations or otherwise make the required progress.
Reporting circumstances in time remains essential
Students should contact their study advisor, student counsellor or student dean as soon as personal circumstances begin affecting their studies.
Waiting until the end of the academic year can seriously weaken the case. The institution may argue that it was not given an opportunity to provide support, monitor the situation or adjust the study plan.
Useful evidence may include:
-
letters from a doctor, psychologist or psychiatrist;
-
treatment records;
-
records of appointments with the study advisor or student counsellor;
-
correspondence showing that the institution was informed;
-
a timeline explaining the effect on specific courses or examinations;
-
and a realistic plan for completing the programme.
Medical evidence should preferably address the relevant academic year and explain the functional consequences of the condition. A diagnosis obtained later may not be enough if it does not clarify how the student was affected during the period in question.
What if the school still applies the “once-only” rule?
The National Commission for the Code of Conduct has confirmed that institutions should no longer apply the once-only restriction mechanically. It has asked institutions to adapt their policies in accordance with the Council of State judgment.
If an institution refuses to consider a continuing circumstance solely because it was already accepted during an earlier academic year, the student should request the institution’s reasoning in writing, submit updated evidence showing that the circumstance continued, explain its effect on the study progress during the new academic year, and consider filing an objection against the institution’s decision.
The student should act before the institution reports the insufficient progress to the IND whenever possible.
Who decides whether the residence permit is withdrawn?
The educational institution does not itself withdraw the residence permit. It assesses the student’s progress and decides whether the insufficient progress must be reported to the IND.
The IND subsequently decides whether the student residence permit should be withdrawn or whether an extension should be refused.
This distinction is important. In many cases, the most effective moment to intervene is while the institution is still considering the personal circumstances. If the institution decides not to report the student, the immediate immigration problem may be avoided.
If the IND has already issued an intended or final withdrawal decision, different deadlines and procedures apply. Immediate legal action may then be necessary.
Contact Pathway Partners
Are you having difficulties communicating with your study advisor or educational institution? Has your school refused to consider your medical, psychological or family circumstances? Or are you facing the possible withdrawal of your student residence permit?
Pathway Partners can assist you with:
-
communicating with your study advisor or educational institution;
-
presenting personal circumstances and supporting evidence;
-
responding to an intended report or withdrawal of sponsorship;
-
assessing whether the institution applied the correct legal framework;
-
responding to an (intended) withdrawal by the IND;
-
filing an objection against the withdrawal of a student residence permit;
-
and examining alternative residence options where necessary.
These cases are often subject to short deadlines. Contact Pathway Partners as soon as possible to discuss your circumstances and the available options.