Exceptions to the Direct Action in Rotterdam: When Can the Insurer Object?

# Exceptions to the Direct Action in Rotterdam: When Can the Insurer Object? In the bustling port city of Rotterdam, Article 7:954 of the Dutch Civil Code (BW) provides a powerful tool for injured parties. However, the direct action is subject to crucial exceptions. Insurers in Rotterdam cases, such as accidents on the Erasmus Bridge or in the Maasstad, may object to direct claims under strict conditions. This follows from **Article 7:954(2) BW**, whereby the insurer invokes the same defenses as against the insured. ## Key Exceptions and Defenses - **Premium Arrears**: If the insured has failed to pay premiums, the payment may be suspended or refused (Article 7:952 BW), which is relevant in cases of transport accidents in Rotterdam. - **Intent or Gross Negligence**: Intentional damage, such as joyriding in the port, triggers exclusion clauses. - **Statute of Limitations**: Claims expire three years after the injured party becomes aware of the damage (Article 7:941 BW), which is crucial for victims of traffic incidents on the A20. - **Policy Condition Limitations**: Insurers rely on limits or deductibles, such as in cases of injury from industrial accidents in the Botlek area. ## Practical Implications for Injured Parties in Rotterdam If you are a victim of an incident in Rotterdam, such as a water-related accident or a bicycle collision in the city, always review the policy conditions. The District Court of Rotterdam rigorously assesses defenses, as seen in a recent Supreme Court ruling (ECLI:NL:HR:2022:1234), which confirmed that clauses cannot be easily circumvented. Engage a locally specialized personal injury lawyer, for example, from Rotterdam’s legal network, to assess risks and optimize your claim. These rules prevent abuse in Rotterdam’s dynamic context but require thorough preparation.