Condicio sine qua non in personal injury cases in Delft: the 'but-for-the-accident' test
Condicio sine qua non is a Latin term meaning 'condition without which not'. In Dutch personal injury case law, including cases at the District Court of The Hague (district Delft), a damages claim is only awarded if the injury would not have occurred without the accident. This test is essential for establishing causality in personal injury cases around Delft. At the District Court of The Hague, a claim may be rejected if the condicio sine qua non is not satisfied, even in cases of demonstrable damage.
What does condicio sine qua non mean for residents of Delft?
The condicio sine qua non test checks whether the accident is the actual cause of the injury. Judges in the district of the District Court of The Hague, which includes Delft, ask: Would the victim also have sustained the injury without the accident? A 'yes' means that causality is absent. This doctrine stems from Supreme Court rulings, such as HR 17 December 1965, NJ 1966/216, where direct consequence of the accident is decisive.
In Delft, you can get free advice from the Juridisch Loket Delft about this test in bicycle accidents or traffic incidents in the city.
Practical example from Delft
Situation: Marie is cycling on the Rotterdamseweg in Delft and falls, breaking her wrist. Medical evidence shows pre-existing osteoporosis that increases fracture risk. Question: would she have gotten the fracture without the fall?
- Yes, condicio not satisfied: If doctors determine that the fracture was inevitable within months due to bone weakness, the accident is not the unique cause. The District Court of The Hague may refuse or limit compensation.
- No, condicio satisfied: If the osteoporosis was irrelevant and the fall was the direct trigger, full compensation follows.
Difference with adequate causality
The condicio sine qua non differs from adequate causality (see here). Condicio is purely factual; adequate causality weighs probability legally. In Delft cases, the District Court of The Hague applies both.
| Test | Definition | Delft example |
|---|---|---|
| Condicio sine qua non | Accident is the sole cause. | Bicycle fall on Haagweg causes fracture in fit person. |
| Adequate causality | Damage is a typical consequence. | Tram accident in Delft city centre leads to PTSD in vulnerable cyclist. |
Legal basis in Delft context
The test is not literally in the law, but flows from case law at the District Court of The Hague. Important provisions:
- Art. 6:101 BW: Liability for direct damage due to conduct.
- Art. 6:162 BW: Compensation only for direct cause of injury.
- Supreme Court rulings: Such as HR 17 December 1965, applied in local cases.
Victims in Delft can consult the Juridisch Loket Delft for help with claims. For complex cases: proceedings at District Court of The Hague, Delft location.
Application at District Court of The Hague
In recent judgments (Delft district), the court applies a strict condicio test, especially in cases of pre-existing conditions. Proof via medical experts is crucial.