Projet de loi modifiant la loi du 21 novembre 1989 relative à l'assurance obligatoire de la responsabilité en matière de véhicules automoteurs.
General information ¶
- Submitted by
- MR Swedish coalition
- Submission date
- April 12, 2017
- Official page
- Visit
- Status
- Adopted
- Requirement
- Simple
- Subjects
- motor vehicle insurance third-party insurance
Voting ¶
- Voted to adopt
- Groen CD&V Vooruit Ecolo LE PS | SP DéFI ∉ Open Vld N-VA LDD MR
- Abstained from voting
- PVDA | PTB PP VB
Contact form ¶
Do you have a question or request regarding this proposition? Select the most appropriate option for your request and I will get back to you shortly.
Discussion ¶
May 18, 2017 | Plenary session (Chamber of representatives)
Full source
President Siegfried Bracke ⚙
Ms. Linnen is the rapporteur. It refers to its written report.
Johan Klaps N-VA ⚙
This bill has been discussed extensively in the Committee on Business and has our full support. It is high time that this law of 1989 is modernized and adapted to the reality. That is exactly what is happening now.
The draft law has the merit of removing the ambiguity regarding the role and assignments of the Common Guarantee Fund. That only provides more security for the insured, which we all want to pursue, of course.
Furthermore, it is now being made clear about electric bikes. Anyone who has an electric bike with a garage button does not fall under the obligation of motor vehicle liability insurance, which is a good thing. This is a clear and logical decision. It is still waiting for the Working Group “Obrigatory Insurance” to get the same clarity also about all sorts of increasingly popular forms of motor vehicles, such as the monowiel and the hoverboard. We hope that this too can be clarified quickly.
Our group is pleased with the fact that this draft law sets in various ways the compensation of the non-responsible victim when several vehicles are involved in the accident and no responsible vehicle can be identified. There have been several judicial rulings on this subject since 2000, which caused much confusion and uncertainty. We can only support this adjustment.
Griet Smaers CD&V ⚙
Mr. Speaker, our group is also satisfied with the present bill, as it carries out a number of technical adjustments, as well as a number of important substantive and substantial adjustments following the review of the existing law of 21 November 1989. It now offers a number of solutions and improvements in a number of cases that were illogical and that have already been followed by a lot of jurisprudence that has pointed out legislative uncertainties.
We are pleased, among other things, that there is now also greater clarity regarding the payment of damages to victims when several vehicles are involved in an accident and it is not possible to determine which vehicle caused the accident. We are also pleased that there is an end to the uncertainty about whether an insurance company can claim against the driver who does not comply with the driver’s license regulations. It is now finally possible for an insurance company to exercise that story.
Furthermore, we are pleased that the Minister has responded to some of our concerns in the committee and made clear that future sustainable means of transport, such as electric bikes, are in principle not covered by the insurance obligation when the driver of the electric bike also uses the trappers. If there is purely a movement with drive without using the trappers and therefore having to move itself, the vehicle is equated with a motor vehicle. If this is not the case, then the vehicle is not equated with a motor vehicle and therefore will be excluded from the insurance obligation. This is a good thing, because with it we want to once again emphasize support for future sustainable means of transport. We hope that they will not be overloaded with administrative burdens and certain insurance obligations.
We fully support the present bill.