The right to compensation of road traffic victims vs. the possible insolvency of the traffic offender

It is a sad fact that the number of road accident victims is rising year after year. In a previous blog The various security measures and penalties that both the public prosecutor's office and the police courts are using to reduce these figures were discussed. Unfortunately, the tragedy in Strépy reminded us of the human dramas that can be caused when a vehicle is used in an inappropriate manner. The question arises, however, of what happens to the victims and their families. Will they be compensated for their suffering or will they be left out in the cold when the party responsible for the damage turns out to be insolvent?

In order to cushion the often heavy financial consequences for traffic victims as best as possible, the legislator provided a safeguard in the Act of 21 November 1989 on compulsory liability insurance for motor vehicles (hereinafter referred to as the "WAM Act"). This law states that only motor vehicles may be driven on public roads.[1] shall be permitted in the event that the civil liability to which they may give rise is covered by an insurance contract which complies with the provisions of this Law and which has not been suspended. The obligation to take out this insurance rests with the owner of the motor vehicle but extends, in terms of protection, to any driver (unless he is a thief or a receiver) and the occupants of the motor vehicle. The owner or holder who operates a motor vehicle not covered by this insurance may be punished by imprisonment, a driving ban and/or a fine. Thanks to this compulsory insurance, road traffic accident victims or their relatives can recover their damages from the insurance company of the vehicle concerned and are therefore not confronted with the possible insolvency of the driver.

However, if the vehicle in question is not insured or the insurer appears to be bankrupt, a hit-and-run was committed, so that the perpetrator is unknown, there is a case of force majeure on the part of the perpetrator, the vehicle in question was stolen, the insurer would not respond or it concerns a foreign insurer without a claims representative in Belgium, the guarantee provided for in the WAM Act does not offer any protection to road traffic victims and their surviving relatives. In order to compensate them for their damages even in such situations, the Belgian legislator established the Joint Motor Insurance Fund in 1957. The fund compensates for physical damage in the broad sense and for material damage up to EUR 100,000. After the victims have been compensated, this fund steps in to recover the sums paid from the party responsible for the damage.

Thanks to these initiatives of the Belgian legislator, road victims can therefore obtain compensation for their suffering. However, the question arises whether more should not be done to prevent accidents involving victims, for example by imposing stricter conditions for being allowed to drive a vehicle. After all, prevention is always better than cure.


[1] Motor vehicles: vehicles intended for travel on the ground and capable of being propelled by mechanical power without being attached to rails. Everything coupled to the vehicle is considered to be part of it.