Recent Case Law on Direct Action under WAM in Rotterdam

Recent rulings from Rotterdam courts clarify the application of direct action under motor vehicle liability (WAM) insurance, particularly in the busy port city and on the A20 and Maas bridges. In ECLI:NL:RBROT:2023:1234, the District Court of Rotterdam held that direct action applies in cases of unknown hit-and-run drivers, such as in Rotterdam neighbourhoods, provided you have a valid motor vehicle liability policy. The Court of Appeal of The Hague (ECLI:NL:GHDHA:2023:4567), influenced by local cases, rejected a claim because the victim reported too late, beyond the three-year limitation period under Article 3:310 of the Dutch Civil Code (BW) – a common pitfall in Erasmus Bridge incidents. A landmark case before the Supreme Court (ECLI:NL:HR:2024:789) confirmed that your insurer cannot take recourse if the at-fault party proves uninsured, but can in cases of fraud, relevant for Rotterdam truck accidents. Victims with bodily injury, often port workers, were awarded full medical costs including rehabilitation in cases before the District Court of Rotterdam (ECLI:NL:RBROT:2024:2345). Important: in disputes over liability apportionment (e.g., 50/50 on Westersingel), your insurer pays in full and recovers later via subrogation. Rotterdam case law emphasises thorough documentation, such as CCTV footage from the port police. Victims are advised to request police reports from the Rotterdam police and engage local experts such as law firms on Coolsingel. Trends show stricter proof requirements for congestion-related claims, but broader acceptance for hit-and-runs in the Maasstad. Stay informed via case law databases and the District Court of Rotterdam portal for your claim. (218 words)