Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-94fs2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-05T17:00:39.777Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Ten Tortuous Years: An overview of Dutch tort law in the judgments of the Hoge Raad (Supreme Court) and of some lower courts, in the parliamentary history of the Burgerlijk Wetboek (Civil Code) and in jurisprudence

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 May 2009

Baron A.J. Otto van Wassenaer van Catwijck
Get access

Extract

During the last decade Dutch tort law has developed at such a monumental rate, that an overview might benefit readers that practice the law in other legal systems. These developments are not confined to the numerous judgments of the courts, but have resulted jointly from these decisions and from the activities of the legislature, i.e., (the judicial committees of) the Houses of Parliament conjointly with the Special Section for the New Civil Code of the Department of Justice. The work to renew the BW,1 commenced in 1947, involved a fundamental rethinking of the law of torts to be enacted in Book 6. This resulted in the publication of a proposal for Book 6, published in 1961, followed by a government draft bill in 1976. This draft bill was extensively discussed in the legal journals and it was later modified by a later draft bill. In all, it took Parliament some 15 years to finally amend and enact these drafts, together with those of Books 3, 5 and 7 (in part), and they finally entered into force in 1992.

Type
Research Article
Information
Netherlands International Law Review , Volume 44 , Issue 1 , May 1997 , pp. 61 - 88
Copyright
Copyright © T.M.C. Asser Press 1997

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

*

Emeritus Professor of private law at the Free University of Amsterdam. Baron van Wassenaer van Catwijck unfortunately died in August 1996 after a long illness and this article represents his last published work.

The Board is grateful to Prof. Cees van Dam, Baron van Wassenaer van Catwijck's successor at the Free University of Amsterdam, for his useful additions to this article

References

1. Burgerlijk Wetboek (Civil Code).

2. WVW = Wegenverkeerswet (Road Traffic Act). These articles contain rules on liability i road traffic accidents involving motor vehicles and non-motorised traffic victims.

3. HR April 3, 1987, NJ 1988, 275, note C.J.H. Brunner (L&L v. Drenth).

4. HR October 9, 1992, NJ 1994, 535, note C.J.H. Brunner; VR 1993, 19, note A.J.O. van Wassenaer van Catwijck (DES); a case note by J. Spencer and myself appeared in CLJ (1993) pp. 206–209; see also the further comments by Teulings, J.G., ‘DES and Market Share Liability in the Netherlands’, LQR (1994) pp. 228–233.Google Scholar

5. HR May 31, 1985, NJ 1986, note C.J.H. Brumer.

6. HR June 28, 1991, NJ 1992, 622, note C.J.H. Brunner; VR 1992, 34. Earlier decisions in the same vein, but not as explicit, were:

– HR October 21, 1988, NJ 1989, 729, note C.J.H. Brunner; VR 1991, 24 note A.J.O. van Wassenaer van Catwijck, the ‘circus donkey’ case;

– HR September 28, 1990, NJ 1992, 619, note C.J.H. Brunner (under 620); VR 1991, 25, note A.J.O. van Wassenaer van Catwijck (under 24);

– HR October 12, 1990, NJ 1992, 620, note C.J.H. Brunner; VR 1991, 26, note A.J.O. van Wassenaer van Catwijck (under 24).

7. HR December 8, 1989, NJ 90, 778, note C.J.H. Brunner; VR 90, 79, note A.J.O. van Wassenaer van Catwijck.

8. HR February 2, 1987, NJ 1988, 57, note C.J.H. Brunner; VR 1987, 35, note A.J.O. van Wassenaer van Catwijck; HR January 24, 1992, NJ 1992, 302; VR 1992, 132, note A.J.O. van Wassenaer van Catwijck.

9. HR March 27, 1992, NJ 1992, 496, note P.A. Stein; VR 1993, 9.

10. HR June 27, 1975, NJ 1976, 81 (Heesters v. Schenkelaars Muziekinstrumenten); HR January 9, 1987, NJ 1987, 948, note P.A. Stein (Sweegers v. Van den Hout).

11. HR July 8,1992, NJ 1992,714; VR1992, 133, note A.J.O. van Wassenaer van Catwijck.

12. While the BW was being enacted, from 1947 to the present day, those proposed parts not yet enacted were generally referred to as the New BW. Since 1992 Books 1–6 have been fully implemented and Book 8 for the large part. Book 7 dealing with special contracts is partially in force.

13. HR April 8, 1983, NJ 1984, 717, note C.I.H. Brunner; VR 1983, 65, note A.J.O. van Wassenaer van Catwijck.

14. The District Court of Assen June 14, 1994, VR 1996, 123 (Booij-Kruize v. Univé Verzekeringen).

15. HR April 3, 1987, NJ 1987, 703, note W.C.L. van der Grinten.

16. Art. 179 deals with liability for animals and does not provide for any changes to the old BW.

17. The classic term of ‘master-servant’ is here used for the modern‘employer-employee’ relationship.

18. HROctober 16,1992, NJ 1993, 264, note P.A. Stein; VR 1993, 74, note H.A. Bouwman.

19. Lately HR April 22,1994, NJ 1944,624 (cuttings from yew branches which killed horses).

20. See also Bauw, E., ‘Liability for Contaminated Land: Lessons from the Dutch Experience’, 43 NILR (1996) pp. 136–139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

21. These sections create liability for these substances while actually in transport or transit.

22. The Motorised Vehicles and Bicycles Act.

23. The term tortfeasor should here be avoided, because his or her liability may rest on breach of contract or any other cause where the law obliges a debtor to pay damages to a creditor.

24. HR June 1, 1990, NJ 1991, 720, note C.J.H. Brunner; VR 1990, 174, note A.J.O. van Wassenaer van Catwijck (the case of Ingrid Kolkman).

25. HR May 31, 1991, NJ 1991, 721, note C.J.H. Brunner; VR 1991, 119, note A.J.O. van Wassenaer van Catwijck (the case of Marbeth van Uitregt).

26. HR February 29, 1992, NJ 1993, 566, note C.J.H. Brunner; VR 1992, 93, note H.F. van den Haak (the case of Vrerink).