Pain and Suffering and Future Quality of Life in Rotterdam
In Rotterdam, with its busy port and intensive traffic flows, good and bad chances are also discounted in non-material damage, such as pain and suffering. Judges weigh whether victims of, for example, Maasvlakte accidents or A20 crashes would also have experienced limitations without the incident, such as due to hereditary conditions or rotabgedoe. Article 6:106 BW remains the basis for non-pecuniary damage.
The Supreme Court in judgment HR 20 December 2019 (ECLI:NL:HR:2019:1960) ruled that in psychological injuries from Rotterdam work accidents, probabilistic considerations are essential. A 70% chance of depression due to shift work in the port, independent of the accident, significantly reduces the pain and suffering compensation.
Practical Examples from Rotterdam Case Law
In whiplash claims after bicycle accidents on the Erasmus Bridge, the opposing party often argues that complaints are temporary (good chance), which reduces the compensation. Victims from Rotterdam-South collect diaries, medical records from Erasmus MC, and witness statements from port workers to substantiate causality. Insurers consult the 'ANWB Pain and Suffering Guide' with regional corrections for Rotterdam lifestyle and use the local Personal Injury Calculator tool.
This approach ensures justice in the port city, but requires multidisciplinary expertise from Rotterdam personal injury specialists for reliable prognoses on future work limitations.