In recent years it occurred several times that a ship collided into a bridge of which it was known that it would be replaced in the nearby future. For example the Dorkwerderbrug near Groningen has been hit several times in the past years. Also the Botlekbrug has recently been hit by a vessel. The building of the new Dorkwerderburg will be finalised at the end of 2015. The new Botlekbrug is already in use. In case such a bridge that is about to be replaced is hit by a ship, the question arises whether the owner of the bridge can claim payment of the costs that will be made in case the bridge would be permanently repaired or whether instead in view of the building of the new bridge only payment can be claimed of the costs made to temporarily repair the bridge.

If in the aforementioned cases when determining the extent of damage one takes into account the costs of permanently repairing the bridge then such calculation is called the abstract damage calculation. If on the other hand one takes into account the costs of temporarily repairing the bridge, being the costs that in fact have been made by the owner of the bridge, then one speaks of the concrete damage calculation.

When determining the damage in case of abstract damage calculation for efficiency reasons will be abstracted from the individual circumstances that are connected to the person suffering the damage. This in contrast to the concrete damage calculation where all circumstances are taken into account.

It follows from the current case law that the abstract calculation of damage is frequently accepted in cases concerning property damage (and the loss of property). In such cases the party suffering the damage in principle can claim payment of an amount equal to the depreciation of the property. Such depreciation can in case of property damage be determined based on the repair costs as determined through objective standards, irrespective whether or not the repair has in fact been carried out.

A bridge is regarded as property. This means that if a bridge is hit the damage in principle has to be determined through the abstract damage calculation.

However, the question is whether it is reasonable that the damage of the injured in case of property damage is calculated through the abstract way. The Advocate-General Mr. Huydecoper correctly sets out in his conclusion of the court case of the Supreme Court dated 3 October 2003, NJ 2004, 50, that in the literature there is a certain tension noticeable between the abstract way of calculating damage and the view that the injured should not receive more than the actual damage suffered (concrete damage calculation). In that respect the Advocate-General Mr. Huydecoper refers also to three court cases of the Supreme Court. It follows from these court cases that also in case of property damage, abstract damage calculation on the basis of the permanent repair costs determined through objective standards is not acceptable, if beforehand it is clear that the actual repairing of the property is unnecessary or useless.

Although there is currently no general rule that provides when the abstract calculation of damage should be applied (and when this should not be applied), the current doctrine gives an important starting point according to Advocate-General Mr. Huydecoper. Such starting point is according to the Advocate-General that the abstract damage calculation should not be applied in cases that are highly characterised by their own special circumstances. Pursuant to Article 6:97 Dutch Civil Code the abstract damage calculation should lead to a reasonable result. If the abstract damage calculation does not lead to a reasonable result, then it should not be applied but instead the concrete damage calculation should be applied. Article 6:97 Dutch Civil Code is giving the judge the possibility to calculate the damage in a way that is reasonable.

It therefore follows from the current court cases that in case of property damage, as the damaging of a bridge, in principle the abstract damage calculation should be applied. This means that the owner of a bridge is entitled to an indemnification equal to the depreciation of the property. Such depreciation should then be determined based on the amount of the costs of permanently repairing the bridge as determined through objective standards. To determine the depreciation one could request several construction companies to give a quote for the repairing of the bridge. However, it also follows from the current court cases that the abstract damage calculation should not be applied in cases which are highly characterised by their own special circumstances. It seems that one can speak of such own special circumstances if there are already plans to replace the bridge. One could argue that in such cases the owner of the bridge is only entitled to claim payment of the costs that have to be made to temporarily repair the bridge so that it can be used until the moment that the new bridge will be taken into use. In other words, in such cases it seems more appropriate to apply the concrete damage calculation. In view of Article 6:97 Dutch Civil Code application of the abstract damage calculation will mainly lead to an unreasonable result.