Terug naar Encyclopedie
Letselschade

Condicio sine qua non in personal injury cases: Factual and legal boundaries of the 'but-for-the-accident' test

Discover the condicio sine qua non test in personal injury cases in The Hague: when is an accident the real cause? Practical examples and laws via the District Court of The Hague.

2 min leestijd

Condicio sine qua non in personal injury cases: the 'but-for-the-accident' test in The Hague

Condicio sine qua non literally means 'condition without which not'. At the District Court of The Hague (Prins Clauslaan 60), this test is used to assess whether injury was caused solely by an accident. Without this causality, a claim is rejected, even if there is damage. These principles are standard in Hague personal injury cases.

Meaning of condicio sine qua non

This test checks whether the injury would have occurred without the accident. The judge in The Hague asks: Was the accident the actual cause? If the injury would have happened anyway, the test fails. This stems from Supreme Court rulings, such as HR 17 December 1965, NJ 1966/216, which are also applied locally.

In The Hague, this is often seen in traffic accidents or workplace accidents. At the Legal Aid Office The Hague (Lutherse Burgwal 10), you can get free advice on this test.

Practical example from Hague case law

Case: A cyclist in The Hague falls and breaks a leg. Medical evidence shows pre-existing weakened bone density. Question: would the fracture have occurred without the fall?

  • Test not satisfied: If doctors demonstrate that a fracture was inevitable within months due to osteoporosis, causality is denied. Compensation nil or limited.
  • Test satisfied: With normal bone and direct fall causation, full compensation via District Court of The Hague.

Difference with adequate causation

Condicio sine qua non is purely factual: was the accident necessary? Adequate causation is legal: is this a foreseeable consequence? In Hague cases, the court combines both.

TestDescriptionHague example
Condicio sine qua nonAccident is essential cause.Tram accident in The Hague causes whiplash in healthy victim.
Adequate causationDamage is typical consequence.Slip on icy road leads to PTSD in person with trauma history.

Statutory basis in Dutch and Hague practice

No direct statutory text, but established in case law. Core articles:

  • Art. 6:101 BW: Liability for direct damage, applied by District Court of The Hague.
  • Art. 6:162 BW: Compensation only for direct personal injury.
  • HR rulings: Such as HR 17 December 1965 and more recent ones, relevant for local teams at District Court of The Hague.

Consult the Legal Aid Office The Hague for personal assessment of your condicio sine qua non.

### Arslan & Arslan Advocaten **Arslan & Arslan Advocaten** provides professional legal guidance and support for your legal matters. - Website: [www.arslan.nl](https://arslan.nl) - Email: [info@arslan.nl](mailto:info@arslan.nl) - Free initial consultation