Attribution of Government Tort in Amsterdam

Attribution of Government Tort in Amsterdam

In Amsterdam, attribution of government tort plays a key role in claims against the Municipality of Amsterdam or the State. It concerns whether an unlawful act by a civil servant or government body can be attributed to the local or national government, allowing residents to recover damages from the responsible authority.

Legal Basis

The rules on attribution of government tort are found in civil liability law, particularly Article 6:162 of the Dutch Civil Code (DCC). This article provides that anyone who acts unlawfully must compensate the resulting damage. For government bodies such as the Municipality of Amsterdam, Article 6:163 DCC applies to internal attribution, but Supreme Court case law is decisive. Key rulings include:

• Katwijk case (Supreme Court 27 November 1992, NJ 1993/293): An act by a civil servant is attributable if it falls within the 'scope of duties and authority'.
• Bleker case (Supreme Court 26 June 2009, NJ 2010/157): The appearance of authority can also lead to attribution.

In administrative matters, Article 3:4 of the General Administrative Law Act (GALA) refers to qualification as a government tort, but damage claims proceed under the DCC at the District Court of Amsterdam.

Conditions for Attribution

Three cumulative requirements ensure attribution of government tort in Amsterdam:

1. Duty-related: The civil servant is exercising their public function, including closely related acts.
2. Organizational link: A hierarchical or functional connection to the Municipality of Amsterdam; independent contractors generally fall outside this scope.
3. No private initiative: The act is unrelated to personal motives.

The Supreme Court interprets this broadly: even ultra vires acts within the 'service sphere' lead to attribution.

Exceptions to Attribution

Not all civil servant errors render the Municipality of Amsterdam liable. Exceptions include:

• Genuine private acts: Such as a civil servant receiving a private fine at the office.
• Law enforcement matters: Article 6:175 DCC limits liability for good faith police actions.
• External deviance: Violence stemming from private frustration outside the scope of duties.

Comparison: Attributable vs. Non-Attributable

Practical Examples in Amsterdam

An Amsterdam resident applies for a terrace permit from the Municipality of Amsterdam. The civil servant loses the documents and rejects the application. The entrepreneur suffers losses due to the delay – attributable, as it is duty-related. File a claim at the District Court of Amsterdam under Article 6:162 DCC.

Or: During a house search in the Pijp neighborhood, police unnecessarily damage furniture. Attributable, unless motivated by private reasons. Submit the claim to the police or the State.

Conversely: An Amsterdam waste collector steals a bicycle during their route in the Jordaan. Potentially non-attributable if purely for personal gain, but often attributable due to the service context.

Rights and Obligations in Case of Attribution

Rights of Amsterdam residents:

• Claim damages via summons at the District Court of Amsterdam or administrative objection.
• Prove causality between the act and the loss.
• Statute of limitations: 5 years (Article 3:310 DCC).

Obligations of the government:

• Internal recourse against the civil servant in cases of gross negligence.
• Conduct thorough and transparent investigations.

Read more in our article on unlawful government acts.

Frequently Asked Questions

Tips and Recommendations

For a strong claim involving attribution of government tort in Amsterdam:

• Document thoroughly: dates, names, witness statements.
• Report damage in writing to the Municipality of Amsterdam and initiate objection proceedings.
• Seek free advice from the Amsterdam Legal Aid Office.
• Consider mediation through the municipality for quick resolution.