The Kelderluik Case in Leiden
The Kelderluik case is a landmark Supreme Court ruling from 1968 that governs liability for defective buildings, also relevant for residents of Leiden. A passerby fell through an open cellar hatch and suffered serious injuries. The Supreme Court held the owner liable under strict liability, without proof of fault. This forms the basis for personal injury claims in Leiden involving trips or falls on streets or in buildings.
What is the Kelderluik Case?
The Kelderluik case (Supreme Court, 5 November 1968, NJ 1969/10) concerns an accident in which a boy fell through an open cellar hatch. The shopkeeper had opened the hatch for deliveries without barriers or warnings. The victim suffered a broken leg and claimed compensation. The Supreme Court ruled that the hatch constituted a defect in the building's setup, creating an abnormal risk for passersby in cities like Leiden.
This ruling established strict liability for defective constructions. It focuses on the objective danger posed by a defect, rather than fault, simplifying claims for Leiden residents in accidents involving slips or falls. It aligns with local issues such as slipping and falling in Leiden, where pedestrians face risks from poor maintenance of sidewalks or stairs.
Essence: a building has a defect if it fails to meet expected standards for its purpose, leading to injury. This includes cellar hatches, but also stairs, railings, or edges along Leiden's canals.
Legal Basis
The ruling is codified in the Dutch Civil Code (DCC), Book 6, Title 3, Section 5, particularly Article 6:174 DCC: "The possessor of a building or structure is liable for damage to third parties caused by a defect therein." This is pure strict liability; no negligence is required.
Article 6:175 DCC defines a defect as a deviation from reasonable expectations for its intended use. Examples include open hatches without signs, slippery floors, or loose sidewalk tiles in Leiden. The possessor (owner or tenant) is liable, except in cases of force majeure or claimant's own fault (art. 6:101 DCC). In Leiden, the District Court of Leiden handles such cases. The ruling often links to Article 6:162 DCC (unlawful act) in negligence scenarios but provides a stricter standard. Cases like the Schilder case (Supreme Court 1994) expanded it.
Practical Examples in Leiden
This ruling plays a daily role in Leiden personal injury cases. Suppose you trip over a broken manhole cover on a sidewalk in the city center. The Municipality of Leiden as possessor is liable under Article 6:174 DCC. Claim medical costs, lost income, and pain and suffering without proving fault.
In a Leiden apartment building, a resident slips on a wet stair without anti-slip measures. If the owners' association fails to maintain it properly, the ruling applies. Courts assess NEN standards (e.g., NEN 3215). In a 2022 case at the District Court of Leiden, a victim received €25,000 after falling over a faulty balcony railing.
Leiden shopkeepers: secure a cellar hatch with barriers and signs when in use, or risk liability.
Rights and Obligations in Leiden
Victims are entitled to full compensation, such as:
- Medical costs: hospital and therapy.
- Lost income: missed wages.
- Pain and suffering: €1,000–€50,000 for distress.
- Other: assistance or travel expenses.
Possessors must maintain; otherwise, they bear liability (art. 6:174(2) DCC). Limitation period: 5 years (art. 3:310 DCC). Report to Leiden police, take photos, and consult Het Juridisch Loket Leiden for free advice.
Comparison with Other Liability Grounds
| Type of Liability | Basis | Proof Required | Example |
|---|---|---|---|
| Strict Liability (Kelderluik) | Art. 6:174 DCC | Defect in setup | Fall through open hatch in Leiden |
| Unlawful Act | Art. 6:162 DCC | Fault/negligence | Slip on wet floor |
Veelgestelde vragen
Wat is mijn retourrecht?
Bij online aankopen heb je 14 dagen retourrecht zonder opgaaf van reden, tenzij de wettelijke uitzonderingen gelden.
Hoe lang geldt de wettelijke garantie?
Goederen moeten minimaal 2 jaar meewerken. Defecten die binnen 6 maanden ontstaan worden verondersteld al aanwezig te zijn.
Kan ik rente eisen over schulden?
Ja, je kunt wettelijke rente eisen (momenteel ongeveer 8% per jaar) over het openstaande bedrag.
Wat kan ik doen tegen oneerlijke handelspraktijken?
Je kunt klacht indienen bij de consumentenbond, de overheid of naar de rechter gaan.
Wat is een kredietovereenkomst?
Een kredietovereenkomst regelt hoe je geld leent, wat de rente is, en hoe je dit terugbetaalt.