Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Transparency in the Insurance Contract Law in the Netherlands

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Transparency in Insurance Contract Law

Part of the book series: AIDA Europe Research Series on Insurance Law and Regulation ((ERSILR,volume 2))

  • 437 Accesses

Abstract

Transparency in insurance contract law raises a lot of questions in Dutch law concerning the role of transparency in the interpretation of contracts. The Dutch Civil Code (Burgerlijk Wetboek) does not contain specific rules on the interpretation of contractual provisions. It seems, therefore, that the Dutch legislator has left it to the Dutch courts to develop rules of interpretation and to determine what should occur in case a contractual provision was unclear. As a result, there is no specific definition of transparency in Dutch (insurance) contract law. Still, with the development of consumer law, the principle of transparency in Dutch (insurance) contract law gained in importance. Especially, the implementation of the European regulation of unfair standard contract terms to Dutch law demanded a new approach to the assessment of transparency and its consequences. Moreover, the notion of transparency has been perceived as an instrument to help determine the scope of the insurer’s duties to inform and of his duties of care, and their amount has increased due to the development of European consumer law.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 149.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 199.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 199.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Hendrikse (2010), p. 54.

  2. 2.

    Rinkes (2010), pp. 30–31.

  3. 3.

    Vriesendorp-van Seumeren (2002), p. 20.

  4. 4.

    Vriesendorp-van Seumeren (2002), p. 21.

  5. 5.

    Vriesendorp-van Seumeren (2002), p. 22; HR 21 November 1986, NJ 1987/946 (Tolbeck/Swindak).

  6. 6.

    HR 19 May 1967, NJ 1967/261 (Saladin/HBU).

  7. 7.

    HR 19 May 1967, NJ 1967/261 (Saladin/HBU).

  8. 8.

    Vloermans (2015), pp. 1–2.

  9. 9.

    Clausing (1994), p. 14.

  10. 10.

    See for an overview of the old case law: Hendrikse (2002), pp. 12–16.

  11. 11.

    Council Directive 93/13/EEC of 5 April 1993 on unfair terms in consumer contracts.

  12. 12.

    The implementation of the contra proferentem rule was late in Dutch law, instead of as of January 1995 this rule started binding only as of the end of 1999. However, Dutch courts have previously given preference to this interpretation rule of their own motion, e.g. see: HR 24 September 1993, NJ 1993, 760 (Brackel/Atlantische Unie van Verzekeringen); HR 21 January 1996, NJ 1996, 683 (Kroymans/Sun Alliance).

  13. 13.

    Ktg. Haarlem 22 August 1975, Prg. 1975/1067; Ktg. Arnhem 30 January 1989, TvC 1989/93.

  14. 14.

    Rechtbank Zwolle 20 September 1939, NJ 1940/577.

  15. 15.

    Leerink (2009), pp. 176–187.

  16. 16.

    Leerink (2009), p. 3.

  17. 17.

    Leerink (2009), pp. 3–4.

  18. 18.

    Loos (2013), p. 174.

  19. 19.

    HR 13 March 1981, NJ 1981/635, ECLI:NL:HR:1981:AG4158 (Haviltex).

  20. 20.

    Hendrikse et al. (2015), p. 27.

  21. 21.

    HR 13 March 1981, NJ 1981/635, ECLI:NL:HR:1981:AG4158.

  22. 22.

    HR 5 April 2013, ECLI:NL:HR:2013:BY8101.

  23. 23.

    Hendrikse et al. (2015), p. 27.

  24. 24.

    HR 7 February 2014, ECLI:NL:HR:2014:260.

  25. 25.

    Hendrikse et al. (2015), pp. 28–29.

  26. 26.

    Rb. Rotterdam 15 February 2006, NJF 2006/339.

  27. 27.

    Hof Den Haag 12 September 2006, NJF 2006/546.

  28. 28.

    Hendrikse et al. (2015), p. 33.

  29. 29.

    Hof Amsterdam 30 September 2008, ECLI:NL:GHAMS:2008:BG2017; Hof Leeuwaarden 3 August 2010, ECLI:NL:GHLL:2010:BN3280. See also Hendrikse et al. (2015), p. 37.

  30. 30.

    Londonck Sluijck (2007), p. 255.

  31. 31.

    Hendrikse et al. (2015), p. 29.

  32. 32.

    Asser et al. (2012), p. 363.

  33. 33.

    HR 20 February 2004, NJ 2005/493 (DSM-Fox).

  34. 34.

    Loos (2013), p. 30. Article 6:235 para 1 of the Dutch Civil Code excludes from its scope of application ‘a legal persons as meant in Article 2:360 of the Civil Code, who at the time of conclusion of the contract has made his last annual account public or to whom prior to that time Article 2:403, paragraph 1, of the Civil Code has been applied’ as well as ‘a party to whom the provisions under point (a) do not apply, if from a registration pursuant to the Commercial Register Act shows that he has fifty or more employees in service at the before-mentioned time of the conclusion of the contract.’ Its para 3 excludes an insured who is also using standard terms and conditions in his or her own dealings, and uses similar terms and conditions.

  35. 35.

    Loos (2013), pp. 257–268, 174–177.

  36. 36.

    Following the CJEU’s judgment in case C-464/01 of 20 January 2005 (Gruber) NJ 2006/278.

  37. 37.

    Loos (2005).

  38. 38.

    Hendrikse et al. (2015), p. 47.

  39. 39.

    Vriesendorp-van Seumeren (2002), p. 21.

  40. 40.

    Vriesendorp-van Seumeren (2002), p. 21.

  41. 41.

    Hijma (2010), p. 34.

  42. 42.

    Hendrikse et al. (2015), p. 54.

  43. 43.

    Hendrikse et al. (2015), pp. 55–56.

  44. 44.

    Hendrikse et al. (2015), p. 56.

  45. 45.

    Which provision implements the rule from Article 5 of the Unfair Contract Terms Directive.

  46. 46.

    Rb. Rotterdam 1 June 2005, ECLI:NL:RBROT:2005:AT8539 (Soldano/Erasmus Verzekeringen BV).

  47. 47.

    Loos (2013), p. 174–177.

  48. 48.

    Vriesendorp-van Seumeren (2002), p. 22.

  49. 49.

    See e.g. Rb. Rotterdam 20 February 2008, ECLI:NL:RBROT:2008:BC6349; Rb. Arnhem 15 December 2010, ECLI:NL:RBARN:2010:BO9558; Hof Amsterdam 11 January 2011, ECLI:NL:GHAMS:2011:BP1172. See to the contrary Ktr. (Cantonal judge) Rotterdam 4 December 2001, Prg. 2002/5807.

  50. 50.

    Loos (2013), p. 180.

  51. 51.

    Hijma (1999), pp. 115–116; Hendrikse et al. (2015), p. 45.

  52. 52.

    HR 28 April 1989, NJ 1990/583 (Liszkay II).

  53. 53.

    Hendrikse et al. (2015), p. 48.

  54. 54.

    Hof Amsterdam 30 September 2008, ECLI:NL:GHAMS:2008:BG2107, para 4.9.

  55. 55.

    HR 19 September 1997, NJ 1998/6 (Lottospel); HR 21 February 2003, NJ 2004/567.

  56. 56.

    Claiming that such terms should not be seen as core terms, see: Frenk (2000), p. 129. To the contrary see: Hendrikse et al. (2015), p. 61.

  57. 57.

    Tolman (2010), pp. 23–25; Jongeneel (2010), p. 103.

  58. 58.

    Doorhout Mees (1996), p. 43.

  59. 59.

    Hendrikse et al. (2015), p. 62.

  60. 60.

    Hendrikse et al. (2015), p. 63.

  61. 61.

    Hendrikse et al. (2015), p. 64.

  62. 62.

    Tolman (2010), pp. 23–25.

  63. 63.

    See also: Hendrikse et al. (2015), p. 63.

  64. 64.

    Hendrikse et al. (2015), p. 67.

  65. 65.

    Vriesendorp-van Seumeren (2010), pp. 275–276.

  66. 66.

    Hendrikse et al. (2015), p. 68.

  67. 67.

    Hendrikse et al. (2015), p. 69.

  68. 68.

    Hendrikse et al. (2015), p. 69.

  69. 69.

    Hendrikse et al. (2015), p. 81.

  70. 70.

    Hof ’s-Hertogenbosch 12 June 2009, ECLI:NL:GHSHE:2009:BI7715.

  71. 71.

    Similarly, in B2B insurance contracts see: Hof ‘s-Gravenhage 6 March 2012, ECLI:NL:GHSGR:2012:BV8730.

  72. 72.

    Rb. Utrecht 18 July 2012, ECLI:NL:RBUTR:2012:BX2398.

  73. 73.

    Hendrikse et al. (2015), p. 84.

  74. 74.

    Hendrikse and Rinkes (2015a), p. 201.

  75. 75.

    Hendrikse and Rinkes (2015a), p. 233.

  76. 76.

    Hendrikse and Rinkes (2015a), p. 234.

  77. 77.

    HR 20 December 1996, NJ 1997/638.

  78. 78.

    Hendrikse and Rinkes (2015a), pp. 234–235, 239.

  79. 79.

    HR 15 November 1957, NJ 1958/67 (Baris-Riezenkamp).

  80. 80.

    Hendrikse and Rinkes (2015a), p. 237.

  81. 81.

    Hof Den Haag 21 November 1919, W. 10617.

  82. 82.

    Hendrikse and Rinkes (2015a), p. 238.

  83. 83.

    HR 22 February 1924, NJ 1924/488 (Gummiwaren).

  84. 84.

    Hendrikse and Rinkes (2015a), p. 239.

  85. 85.

    HR 18 April 2003, NJ 2004/634 (Huls/NLP).

  86. 86.

    Rb. Noord-Holland 30 January 2013, ECLI:NL:RBNHO:2013:BZ2272.

  87. 87.

    Hendrikse and Rinkes (2015a), p. 239.

  88. 88.

    Hendrikse and Rinkes (2015a), p. 250.

  89. 89.

    Hendrikse and Rinkes (2015b), p. 521.

  90. 90.

    Hendrikse and Rinkes (2015b), p. 521.

  91. 91.

    HR 15 May 1992, NJ 1993/263.

  92. 92.

    Hof Den Haag 29 May 2007, ECLI:NL:GHSGR:2007:BA6424.

  93. 93.

    Hendrikse and Rinkes (2015b), p. 523.

References

  • Asser C, Wansink JH, van Tiggele N, Salomons FR (2012) 7-IX∗ Bijzondere overeenkomsten (Verzekering), 3rd edn. Kluwer, Deventer

    Google Scholar 

  • Clausing P (1994) Inleiding verzekeringsrecht, 3rd edn. SHD Tjeenk Willink, Alphen aan den Rijn

    Google Scholar 

  • Doorhout Mees TJ (1996) De CAR-verzekering. WEJ Tjeenk Willink, Deventer

    Google Scholar 

  • Frenk N (2000) De gewijzigde opzetclausule in aanspraeklijkheidsverzekeringen, Nieuwsbrief Burgerlijk Wetboek, pp 86–93

    Google Scholar 

  • Hendrikse ML (2002) Eigenschuld, bereddingsplicht en medewerkingsplicht in het schadeverzekeringsrecht. WEJ Tjeenk Willink, Deventer, pp 5–39

    Google Scholar 

  • Hendrikse ML (2010) Uitleg van verzekeringsvoorwaarden: wie draagt het nadeel bij (vermeende) onduidelijkheden en onbegrijpelijkheden in verzekeringsvoorwaarden: de verzekeraar of de (consument-)verzekerde? In: Hendrikse ML, Rinkes JGJ (eds) Consument en verzekering. Uitgeverij Paris, Zutphen, pp 53–73

    Google Scholar 

  • Hendrikse ML, Rinkes JGJ (2015a) De mededelingsplicht bij het aangaan van verzekeringen. In: Hendrikse ML, van Huizen HJG, Rinkes JGJ (eds) Verzekeringsrecht, 4th edn. Kluwer, Deventer, pp 201–272

    Google Scholar 

  • Hendrikse ML, Rinkes JGJ (2015b) Risicoverzwaring en risicovermindering in het verzekeringsrecht. In: Hendrikse ML, van Huizen HJG, Rinkes JGJ (eds) Verzekeringsrecht, 4th edn. Kluwer, Deventer, pp 499–547

    Google Scholar 

  • Hendrikse ML, Rinkes JGJ, Pluymen MH (2015) Verzekeringsrecht en algemene voorwaarden. In: Hendrikse ML, van Huizen HJG, Rinkes JGJ (eds) Verzekeringsrecht, 4th edn. Kluwer, Deventer, pp 25–109

    Google Scholar 

  • Hijma J (1999) Consumentonvriendelijke interpretatie, Weekblad voor Privaatrecht, Notariaat en Registratie 6345, pp 115–116

    Google Scholar 

  • Hijma J (2010) Algemene voorwaarden. Kluwer, Deventer

    Google Scholar 

  • Jongeneel RHC (2010) Werkingssfeer afdeling 6.5.3. In: Wessels B, Jongeneel RHC, Hendrikse ML (eds) Algemene voorwaarden, 5th edn. Kluwer, Deventer

    Google Scholar 

  • Leerink PM (2009) Premie betalen en risico dekken. Nederlands Tijdschrift voor Handelsrecht 4:176–187

    Google Scholar 

  • Londonck Sluijck JB (2007) Kronik polisbepalingen. Aansprakelijkheid Verzekering en Schade 5:129–134

    Google Scholar 

  • Loos MBM (2005) Het begrip ‘consument’ in het Europese en Nederlandse privaatrecht, Weekblad voor Privaatrecht, Notariaat en Registratie 6638, pp 771–772

    Google Scholar 

  • Loos MBM (2013) Algemene voorwaarden. Boom Juridische Uitgevers, Den Haag

    Google Scholar 

  • Rinkes JGJ (2010) Het begrip ‘consument’ in het verzekeringsrecht: nationale en Europese perspectieven. In: Hendrikse ML, Rinkes JGJ (eds) Consument en verzekering. Uitgeverij Paris, Zutphen, pp 11–51

    Google Scholar 

  • Tolman MJ (2010) Contractsvrijheid en kernbedingen: dode hoek in het contractenrecht. In: Tiggele-van der Velde N, Wansink JH (eds) Contractsvrijheid in het verzekeringsrecht. Kluwer, Deventer

    Google Scholar 

  • Vloermans N (2015) Inleiding. De overeenkomst van verzekering. In: Hendrikse ML, van Huizen HJG, Rinkes JGJ (eds) Verzekeringsrecht, 4th edn. Kluwer, Deventer, pp 1–24

    Google Scholar 

  • Vriesendorp-van Seumeren RM (2002) Algemene voorwaarden en verzekeringsrecht. WEJ Tjeenk Willink, Deventer

    Google Scholar 

  • Vriesendorp-van Seumeren RM (2010) Case note to Rb. Amsterdam 3 February 2010. Tijdschrift voor Consumentenrecht 6:276–280

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Centre for European Legal Studies, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK

    Joasia Luzak

  2. Centre for the Study of European Contract Law, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

    Joasia Luzak

Authors
  1. Joasia Luzak
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Joasia Luzak .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Legal Studies, Catholic University of the Sacred Heart, Milano, Italy

    Pierpaolo Marano

  2. School of Law, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK

    Kyriaki Noussia

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Luzak, J. (2019). Transparency in the Insurance Contract Law in the Netherlands. In: Marano, P., Noussia, K. (eds) Transparency in Insurance Contract Law. AIDA Europe Research Series on Insurance Law and Regulation, vol 2. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-31198-8_6

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-31198-8_6

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-31197-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-31198-8

  • eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation