Double Reasonableness Test in Personal Injury Den Haag
The double reasonableness test is an essential legal criterion in Dutch personal injury law, specifically for Den Haag, to determine whether extrajudicial costs (BGK) are reimbursable. This test assesses whether the costs are reasonable in relation to both the damage and the path to settlement. It prevents excessive bills and ensures a fair allocation of costs in injury claims in the Den Haag region.
What does the double reasonableness test mean for victims in Den Haag?
In personal injury cases in Den Haag, such as accidents on busy roads or in the city center, extrajudicial costs (BGK) are crucial. These include expenses for lawyers or experts before a case reaches the Rechtbank Den Haag. The Supreme Court developed the double reasonableness test to evaluate reimbursability through two aspects: reasonableness relative to the damage and to settlement efforts. This article builds on our overview of BGK and is relevant for residents of Den Haag.
The test protects insurers against excessive amounts while ensuring victims receive fair compensation. It is particularly important in cases of personal injury from traffic accidents on the A4 or medical errors in Den Haag hospitals.
Legal basis of the double reasonableness test
This test is based on Article 6:96(2) of the Dutch Civil Code (DCC), which compensates reasonable out-of-court costs. The Supreme Court elaborated on this in the Posnanski judgment (ECLI:NL:HR:2003:AF7096).
BGK must meet two requirements:
- Reasonableness relative to the damage: Costs must not be disproportionate to the total claim. For a €5,000 injury in Den Haag, €10,000 in lawyer fees would not be appropriate.
- Reasonableness relative to the settlement: Expenses must be appropriate to the work required for an agreement. Simple claims in Den Haag do not require extensive files.
In the Van der Wiel judgment (ECLI:NL:HR:2015:2594), the Supreme Court specified an objective assessment, taking into account case complexity and local rates.
The two components explained for Den Haag
First component: Reasonableness relative to the damage
Here, BGK are compared to the total compensation. Roughly, costs may amount to 25-30%. For non-pecuniary damage such as pain and suffering, there is more flexibility.
Example from Den Haag: After a bike accident on Fahrenheitstraat, you claim €20,000 (medical care and lost income). €6,000 in BGK is acceptable (within 30%). For a €2,000 claim, it would be too much.
Second component: Reasonableness relative to the settlement
The necessity of the work performed is central. Were expert opinions in Den Haag indispensable? The court tests for proportionality.
Example: For a whiplash after a collision near Scheveningen, a medical examination (€2,500) is justified. Unnecessary letters in cases of quick acknowledgment are not.
Practical cases from Den Haag personal injury
Illustrations of the double reasonableness test in a local context:
- Traffic accident minor injuries at Binckhorst: €10,000 damage. €3,000 BGK for negotiations: compliant (30%, necessary). Full reimbursement.
- Medical error in Den Haag: €100,000 damage. €25,000 for experts: reasonable due to complexity. Approved.
- Minor fall in city center: €1,000 damage. €4,000 unnecessary costs: fails. Reimbursement max €500.
Disputes are resolved at the Rechtbank Den Haag or by the district court judge. Consult the Juridisch Loket Den Haag for free advice.
Rights and obligations under the test
Victims in Den Haag may claim reasonable BGK but must moderate costs (Art. 6:96(2) DCC):
- Rights:
- Full payment if the test is passed.
- Detailed breakdown by your advisor.
- Court review if refused.
- Obligations:
- Substantiated invoices.
- No excesses.
- Prompt damage reporting.
Insurers acknowledge reasonable costs but scrutinize excesses. For questions: Juridisch Loket Den Haag.
| Aspect | Reasonable Example Den Haag |
|---|