Shock Damage from Confrontation in Amsterdam
Shock damage from confrontation is psychiatric personal injury that arises when you directly witness a serious accident or the death of a loved one in Amsterdam. You must experience the event through your senses, such as seeing or hearing it, to claim compensation from the Amsterdam District Court. This article explains your rights and the claims process, with a focus on local scenarios like bike and tram accidents.
What is shock damage from confrontation?
In Amsterdam's bustling streets, shock damage from confrontation can affect secondary victims who directly witness trauma to a primary victim, such as a family member suffering serious injury or death. This falls under the broader category of shock damage and requires direct confrontation: perception at the scene via sight, hearing, or other senses. For more on shock damage in general, read our article on Shock Damage and Affection Damage.
Legal basis for shock damage in Amsterdam
The rules stem from Articles 6:95 and 6:106 of the Dutch Civil Code (BW). Article 6:95 BW establishes liability for unlawful acts, while Article 6:106 BW compensates for psychiatric harm such as shock damage. The Supreme Court has refined the criteria:
- Supreme Court 27 October 2000, Esmil: Direct sensory perception required.
- Supreme Court 28 November 2003, Klein: Within the 'zone of the accident', relevant for Amsterdam hotspots.
- Supreme Court 11 July 2014, Jansen: Close relationship and causal link to the injury.
Requirements for shock damage compensation in Amsterdam
The Amsterdam District Court assesses claims based on these criteria, supported by medical and factual evidence.
- Direct perception: Seeing, hearing, or smelling at the Amsterdam accident site; no photos or stories.
- Close relationship: Partner, child, parent, or cohabitant; friends usually not.
- Serious trauma: Permanent injury or death of the primary victim.
- Causality: Symptoms like PTSD, diagnosed by a psychiatrist.
- Fault: Liable party at fault, e.g., reckless cycling.
Confrontation vs. mediated damage
| Aspect | Confrontation Damage | Mediated Damage |
|---|---|---|
| Perception | Direct at the scene | Indirect via media/others |
| Chance of award | High (Supreme Court case law) | Low |
| Example | Parent sees child hit by tram | Family hears news later |
| Compensation | €10,000-€50,000 pain and suffering | Often none |
Amsterdam case examples
Example 1: Tram accident
A mother is cycling with her child on the Damrak. Due to the tram driver's negligence, it crashes. She sees her child suffer severe injuries and die, developing PTSD. The Amsterdam District Court awarded €28,000 in pain and suffering (Klein ruling).
Example 2: Construction accident Zuidas
A partner arrives at a Zuidas construction site and sees her husband crushed by falling debris. The Amsterdam District Court awarded €20,000 in 2023 for direct confrontation.
Example 3: Rejected bike claim
A brother hears sirens from a fall on the Prinsengracht and arrives too late for the ambulance. No shock damage: perception too indirect (Esmil ruling).
Rights and obligations in Amsterdam claims
Rights:
- Pain and suffering compensation (€5,000-€60,000 for emotional distress).
- Immaterial costs: therapy, support.
- Access to insurance file.
Obligations:
- Medical evidence (registered physician).
- Claim within 3 years (art. 3:310 BW).
- Cooperate with investigation.
Frequently asked questions
Can I claim if I heard about it by phone?
No, that's mediated damage, rarely awarded. Direct confrontation required (Esmil).
If the victim recovers?
Yes, possible for serious permanent injury if all criteria are met. Consult the Amsterdam Legal Aid Office.