Publications
P.R. van der Vorst, 'Construction All Risks (CAR) Insurance and Advance Loss of Profits (Delay in Start-Up / DSU)', VAST 2024.
This article is a translation of the Dutch article published in the online law journal VAST. See: P.R. van der Vorst, "De CAR-verzekering en toekomstige bedrijfsschade (DSU)", M.A.D. Lex, VAST 2024, P-005. On 27 October 2023, the Technical Engineering Committee of the Netherlands Insurance Exchange Association (VNAB) presented its ‘Advance Loss of Profits’ model clause (below: the ‘model clause’). This is designed to align with the VNAB’s earlier model policy known as the Dutch Insurance Exchange Policy for Construction and Assembly Works 2013 (below: ‘NBBM’). The NBBM is a model or basic policy which – in short – makes it possible to insure against material damage to construction works. With the introduction of the Advance Loss of Profits model clause, the VNAB is making it possible to expand the coverage offered under the NBBM by also insuring loss of profits in addition to the material damage insured under this construction insurance. In this article the author discusses the nature and operation of the model clause, whereby first the material scope of coverage under the NBBM is discussed.
E.E. Krikke, 'A new approach to the new-for-old deduction', SCHADE magazine 2022.
This article is a translation of the Dutch article published in SCHADE magazine. See: E.E. Krikke, "Een nieuwe benadering van de 'aftrek-nieuw-voor-oud'?", SCHADE magazine 2022, 2, p. 34-35. Compensating for damage: that means restoring the injured party as much as possible to the position in which he would have been if the event causing the damage had not occurred. When this happens, all circumstances of the case are taken into account as much as possible. In specific cases, however, a more abstract method of estimating damage can be chosen, for example in the case of property damage. Where property damage occurs, the damage for which compensation is claimed consists of the decline in value, which is generally estimated to be the objective costs of repair.However, where property is repaired, any pre-existing defects it may have are also repaired. Consequently, the injured party may be better off after the repairs have been carried out than before the occurrence of the event that caused the damage. In such cases there are arguments to apply a so-called new-for-old deduction. The author examines this doctrine in view of a recent Noord-Holland District Court ruling.
P.R. van der Vorst, 'VMZB 2021: the new insurance exchange conditions for fire insurance', VAST 2021.
This article is a translation of the Dutch article published in the online law journal VAST. See: P.R. van der Vorst, "De nieuwe beursbrandvoorwaarden: de VMZB 2021", M.A.D. Lex: VAST 2021, P-053. On 28 June of this year, the Netherlands Insurance Exchange Association (VNAB) presented its new model terms and conditions for fire insurance: the VNAB Modular Conditions for Property Damage and Loss of Profits Insurance 2021 (Dutch abbreviation: VMZB 2021). This is a model or basic policy which provides cover for both property damage and loss of profits (business interruption loss). As the successor to the widely used NBZB 2006 Dutch Insurance Exchange Conditions for Property Damage and Loss of Profits Insurance, these new model conditions can be seen as an evolution of their now 15-year-old predecessor. In this article, the authors considers the history of the insurance exchange fire conditions and then discusses the system and content of the VMZB 2021 and finally the changes to the NBZB 2006.
E.E. Krikke, 'A closer look at the replacement costs clause', TAV 2017, 2, p. 17 - 22.
This article is a translation of the Dutch article published in the law journal TAV. See: E.E. Krikke, "De vervangingskostenclausule nader beschouwd", TAV 2017, 2, p. 17 - 22. In its judgment of 4 October 2016, The Hague Court of Appeal considered the interpretation of a replacement costs clause in a business liability policy. Unlike other exclusion clauses (for example, the intent clause), the replacement costs clause has generated little case law and literature. In practice, however, this exclusion for the costs of redelivering the property or service that has been delivered or provided plays an important role and frequently gives rise to discussion of how it should be interpreted. The Court of Appeal’s judgment therefore provides an opportunity to take a closer look at the replacement costs clause and to provide practitioners with more guidance for cases in which they are confronted with this clause. First, the author outlines the general context and discusses the limited case law that is available on the replacement costs clause, whereafter the application of the exclusion in the case of a living product will be examined in more detail.