The legal framework

In personal injury law, the starting point is always to establish which damage has been caused by the accident. First, there must be a causal link. This means that the damage would not have occurred without the accident. In legal terms, this is referred to as the condicio sine qua non.

The next question is whether the damage can be legally attributed to the accident. An important factor here is foreseeability. In other words, was it reasonably foreseeable that this type of damage would result from the accident?

When assessing the amount of damage, reality is key. Ideally, losses are supported by evidence such as invoices or other documentation. If that is not possible, the court may estimate the damage, provided it is sufficiently plausible that the damage has actually been suffered.

This is an important principle. You do not always have to prove your losses down to the last detail, but you do need to demonstrate that the damage is real.

Loss of self-reliance is not awarded based on assumptions, but on concrete evidence.

Standardised damage categories

In practice, personal injury cases often rely on guidelines and standardised amounts. These include compensation for household help, study delay, travel expenses and loss of self-reliance.

These guidelines are intended to reduce disputes, particularly in the early stages of a case. However, they are not strict rules. They serve as a point of reference.

The Guideline on Self-Reliance provides only an estimate of costs. It does not create an automatic right to a fixed amount. If your actual costs are higher, you will need to demonstrate this with concrete evidence.

What needs to be demonstrated

To successfully claim compensation for loss of self-reliance, it is important to clearly show what your situation looked like before and after the accident.

In practice, this means demonstrating:

• which tasks you used to carry out yourself before the accident

• that you are no longer able to carry out those tasks because of your injuries

• that these tasks now have to be performed by others and what costs this involves

In addition, it must be plausible that these activities relate to your actual living situation, such as maintenance work in or around your home and, where relevant, your garden.

Ultimately, the focus is not only on the injury itself, but on the practical impact on your daily life.

The court’s decision

In this case, the injured party had become almost completely disabled. She could barely walk, relied on a wheelchair and mobility scooter, and was fully unfit for work.

An expert confirmed that she was limited in performing maintenance work in and around her home. Despite this, the court rejected her claim for loss of self-reliance.

The reason was that the claim had been insufficiently substantiated.

Although she had referred to the relevant guideline, she had not clearly explained which tasks she had performed before the accident, who had carried them out, or what actual costs were incurred after the accident when others had to take over these tasks.

The court also found it insufficiently plausible that, in a hypothetical situation without the accident, she would have carried out these activities herself alongside a full-time job and other responsibilities.

As a result, this part of the claim was entirely rejected.

Why this decision matters

This decision highlights that referring to a guideline alone is not enough. Even in cases of very serious injury, it is essential to clearly demonstrate what your situation looked like before and after the accident.

In practice, this can be difficult. Many people only realise how much they did themselves once they are no longer able to do so.

Still, it is important to document this as thoroughly as possible. This can include descriptions of tasks, photos of work carried out in and around the home, statements from others and invoices for external help.

The clearer the picture, the stronger the claim.

What this means for victims

Loss of self-reliance may seem like a relatively minor category of damage, but over time the costs can add up significantly, especially if tasks must be outsourced on a structural basis.

This case shows that while guidelines offer useful support, they do not replace proper substantiation. It is therefore crucial to look beyond the injury itself and focus on what has actually changed in your daily life.

What this means for you

If you are no longer able to carry out maintenance or other tasks in or around your home due to an accident, it is important to document your situation as clearly as possible.

Think not only about your current limitations, but also about what you used to do before the accident. The more concrete this picture is, the stronger your claim will be.