The Kelderluik Ruling
The Kelderluik ruling is a landmark Supreme Court decision from 1968 that establishes liability for defective buildings. A passerby fell through an open cellar hatch and sustained serious injuries. The Supreme Court held the owner liable under strict liability, without requiring proof of fault. This forms the cornerstone for personal injury claims in Rotterdam involving trips or falls, and is essential for victims pursuing compensation from the Municipality of Rotterdam or shopkeepers.
What is the Kelderluik Ruling?
The Kelderluik ruling, formally the Supreme Court judgment of 5 November 1968 (NJ 1969/10), concerned an accident in Amsterdam where a 14-year-old boy fell through an open cellar hatch. The shopkeeper had left the hatch open for deliveries without barriers or warnings. After breaking his leg, the boy claimed compensation. The Supreme Court ruled that the hatch constituted a defect in the building's setup, posing an abnormal risk to passersby – a principle that applies perfectly to the bustling streets of Rotterdam.
This ruling established strict liability for defective building structures. It focuses on the objective danger posed by a defect, rather than fault as in tort claims. Victims in Rotterdam, often pedestrians on slippery quays or sidewalks, can more easily claim compensation as a result. It ties into local issues such as slipping and falling around the Maas or in neighborhoods like Delfshaven.
Essence: a building is defective if it lacks expected qualities, leading to injury. This covers not only hatches but also Rotterdam stairs, railings, or port areas.
Legal Basis
The Kelderluik 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 required, the defect suffices. In Rotterdam, the District Court of Rotterdam applies this to municipal roads and properties.
Article 6:175 DCC defines a defect as a deviation from reasonable expectations under normal use. Think of open hatches without barriers, slippery floors in the Markthal, or loose railings at the Erasmusbrug. The possessor (owner, tenant, or Municipality of Rotterdam) bears the risk, except in cases of force majeure or the victim's own fault (art. 6:101 DCC). Contact Juridisch Loket Rotterdam for free advice.
Often linked to Article 6:162 DCC (tort) in negligence cases, but the Kelderluik ruling provides a stricter standard. Rulings like the Schilder ruling (Supreme Court 1994) expanded it, yet it remains core to Rotterdam real estate cases.
Practical Examples
The Kelderluik ruling features daily in Rotterdam personal injury cases. Suppose you trip on a cracked manhole cover on a sidewalk in Feijenoord. The Municipality of Rotterdam, as possessor, is liable under Article 6:174 DCC. Claim medical costs, lost wages, and pain and suffering – without proving negligence.
Or: a resident in a Rotterdam apartment slips on a wet stair without non-slip strips in IJsselmonde. The owners' association failed in maintenance; the ruling applies. Courts assess against NEN standards (e.g., NEN 3215). In a 2023 District Court of Rotterdam case, a victim received €28,000 after falling due to a defective balcony railing on the Kop van Zuid.
For Rotterdam entrepreneurs: secure a cellar hatch during deliveries with barriers and signs, or face liability as in the ruling – relevant for shops in the Oude Noorden.
Rights and Obligations
As a victim in Rotterdam of a defect-related fall, you are entitled to full compensation, including:
- Medical costs: hospital and physiotherapy.
- Lost income: salary loss.
- Pain and suffering: €1,000–€50,000 for distress.
- Other: household help, travel expenses.
The possessor must maintain and repair. Article 6:174(2) DCC: they prove innocence, e.g., third-party fault. Limitation period: 5 years (art. 3:310 DCC) from knowledge of defect/damage. Report to police, take photos, and call Juridisch Loket Rotterdam.
Comparison with Other Liability Grounds
| Type of Liability | Basis | Proof Required | Rotterdam Example |
|---|---|---|---|
| Strict Liability (Kelderluik) | Art. 6:174 DCC | Defect in building | Fall through open hatch in Kralingen |
| Tort | Art. 6:162 DCC | Fault/negligence | Slippery floor due to cleaning error |
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.