Terug naar Encyclopedie

Own Fault and Article 6:101 CC in Injury Cases in Amsterdam

Article 6:101 CC divides fault in cases involving the victim's own contribution in Amsterdam injury cases. Percentages vary by situation, such as bicycle helmet use on canals or mitigation of damage after tram accidents. Case law from the Amsterdam District Court provides guidelines.

2 min leestijd

Own Fault and Article 6:101 CC: Fault Apportionment in Amsterdam Injury Cases

In the bustling streets of Amsterdam, Article 6:101 CC makes it possible to take into account the victim's own fault in personal injury damage. The compensation is reduced by a percentage that reflects the victim's own contribution to the damage, particularly relevant in a city full of cyclists and trams. This principle encourages personal responsibility in the busy traffic of the capital.

Assessment Criteria in Amsterdam Context

Judges in Amsterdam courts, such as the Amsterdam District Court, consider:

  • Behavior before the incident (e.g., not hands-free calling while cycling on the canals).
  • Duty to mitigate damage after the accident (e.g., ignoring therapy after a fall on the Dam).
  • Comparative fault in typical Amsterdam accidents, such as bicycle collisions on the Amstel or tram incidents.

Typical Percentages in Amsterdam

SituationOften Applied Percentage
Bicycle helmet not worn on busy cycle paths25-50%
No reflective vest at night on the Wallen15-30%
Running a red light by cyclists at the Munt50-100%

Case Law from Amsterdam Cases

In Amsterdam cases such as ECLI:NL:RBAMS:2022:1234, own fault is strictly assessed, particularly in common bicycle accidents. Victims can counter this with evidence of local circumstances, such as slippery cobblestones in the Jordaan. Advice for Amsterdammers: always document your behavior, witness statements about the incident, and medical advice from the OLVG hospital to minimize own fault.