A fall from a horse, a kick or a bite can cause serious injury. To obtain compensation, it is not always necessary for the owner to have made a mistake. Dutch law provides for a special form of liability for damage caused by animals. Who you should hold liable, and whether your loss will be compensated in full, depends on the circumstances and on the part the horse played in the accident.
Nederlands: Lees dit artikel in het Nederlands: Letselschade door een paard en aansprakelijkheid bij een paardrijongeval
Türkçe: Bu makaleyi Türkçe okuyun: Atın neden olduğu kişisel yaralanma ve binicilik kazasında sorumluluk
Written by Onur Arslan, attorney at Arslan Advocaten. Registered in the Netherlands Bar’s register of practice areas for employment law and personal injury. Last updated: 22 September 2026.
At a riding school, the keeper of the horse, the business user and the instructor may each have a different role. Whether you were taking part in a lesson or riding independently also matters. In this article you will read which information is needed, why a waiver stating that you ride at your own risk does not settle everything, and which heads of loss deserve attention after a horse riding accident.
In brief
- The keeper of a horse is in principle liable for damage caused by the animal, even without any fault on their part: this is strict liability.
- If the horse is used in the course of a business, for example by a riding school, that liability shifts to the business. Note the test: it concerns using the horse in the course of the business, not merely stabling it. A livery yard that only provides accommodation, while the owner rides and cares for the horse personally, does not use the horse in its business; in that case the private keeper remains liable.
- A fall without a kick or a bite may also fall under this rule if the horse reacted unpredictably.
- In riding lessons, part of the risk is generally borne by the rider, but liability does not disappear as a result; there is no fixed fifty per cent split.
- Signing an ‘own risk’ clause does not automatically rule out a claim; the wording and the circumstances determine what was agreed.
The special liability for animals
The main rule of Article 6:179 of the Dutch Civil Code (BW) concerns the liability of the keeper for damage caused by an animal. This rule is linked to the animal’s own, unpredictable behaviour. It is not limited to situations in which the keeper knew the horse was dangerous or acted negligently.
Whether the rule applies must nevertheless be examined. What exactly did the horse do, and how did that cause the injury? A horse that takes fright, bolts or kicks unexpectedly may raise different questions from damage resulting entirely from a human act in which the animal was merely an instrument. The law also contains an exception that requires legal assessment.
What matters is possession in the legal sense, not simply who happened to be holding the reins or is named in the horse’s passport. If there is doubt about the responsible person, arrangements on ownership, use and stabling are relevant. Holding the right party liable starts with establishing those roles.
Whom do you hold liable: the keeper, the business or the instructor?
In a horse riding accident, three parties are often involved, each on a separate legal basis. They are not mutually exclusive: you may hold more than one of them liable.
| Party | Legal basis | When does this party come into play? | Is fault required? | Points to watch |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| The keeper of the horse | Art. 6:179 BW: strict liability for the animal’s own energy | In the case of damage caused by the animal’s own energy, taking into account the statutory exception in Art. 6:179 BW and, where applicable, Art. 6:181 BW | No | The keeper is not the same as the owner on paper: it is about who keeps the animal for themselves. Ask about the private liability insurance (AVP) |
| The business that uses the horse (riding school, instruction business, hire company) | Art. 6:181 BW: the liability under Art. 6:179 shifts to the business user | If the horse is deployed in the course of the business: lessons, hire, hacks | No | A livery yard that only stables the horse does not use it in its business; the keeper then remains liable |
| The instructor or supervisor | Art. 6:162 BW: their own lack of care; under Art. 6:170 BW the riding school may be liable for the instructor’s fault | Unsuitable horse allocated, insufficient instruction, an exercise that was too demanding, defective equipment, no supervision | Yes | Ask for the lesson plan, the level of the group and the reason why this particular horse was allocated to you |
| The owner or operator of the premises | Art. 6:174 BW: defective building or structure | Damaged arena surface, loose gates, unsafe stable layout | No | Where the premises are used for business purposes, this liability also shifts to the operator under Art. 6:181 BW |
When a riding school or business user comes into play
If a horse is used in the course of a business, Article 6:181 of the Dutch Civil Code may mean that liability lies with the business user. A riding school that uses a horse for riding lessons may therefore be in a different position from a private individual who merely stables the animal.
Not every stable owner is automatically the business user of every horse on the premises. Investigate who organised the activity, who deployed the horse for that activity and what the arrangements were. A sign bearing the name of the riding school is not enough to establish the legal relationship fully.
Ask for the details of the organisation involved and its insurer. Keep the lesson booking, proof of payment, hire agreement or other documents about the use of the horse. This makes it possible to assess which party should be held liable on which basis and prevents a claim from stalling with the wrong legal entity.
Falling from a horse without a kick or bite
A claim is not only possible where there was direct contact such as a kick or a bite. A fall may also have been caused by the horse’s own behaviour. Think of sudden bucking, rearing or an unexpected fright reaction. The specific course of events and its connection with the fall are then important.
On the other hand, a fall may also result from a mistake by the rider, unsuitable equipment or several causes acting together. That calls for a separate assessment. The mere statement that you fell off the horse does not yet say which basis of liability applies.
Write down what happened immediately before the fall. Were you performing an exercise, did the horse react to something, and what instruction were you given? Witnesses, lesson records and camera footage can clarify this. Try to distinguish between what you observed yourself and what you heard from others later.
A kick or bite while grooming or leading a horse
Injuries can also occur away from riding, for example while grooming, feeding, saddling or leading a horse. The special rules on animals may be relevant, but the circumstances remain important. It must be established who was using the animal and in what context the activity took place.
A previous incident or known restlessness may provide additional information. However, strict liability does not always require that the horse had done something similar before. A rejection that merely states that the horse is normally calm should therefore be assessed on its merits.
Your own conduct may also play a role. What instructions had been given, and were you able to understand the risk? For children, beginners or people without experience, different circumstances may carry weight than for a professional groom. There is no standard outcome for every kick or bite.
The instructor and the care taken in the lesson
In addition to liability for the animal, a shortcoming in supervision may be investigated. Did the horse suit the rider’s level? Was the exercise appropriate, and was sufficient explanation given? Was there reason to intervene? An instructor has a different role from someone who is merely the keeper of the horse.
Keep information about your experience and how it was discussed beforehand. A beginner booking a first lesson may expect a different build-up from an experienced rider in an advanced training session. Age, group size and particular limitations may also be relevant, without any single factor automatically determining liability.
A fall during a lesson does not prove that the instructor failed to take sufficient care. A specific complaint must, however, be investigated seriously. Ask for a factual response about the instruction and safety measures instead of only a general reference to the risks of horse riding.
The arrangements on the use of the horse
In a horse riding accident, several arrangements may overlap. For example, you take lessons at a riding school but ride a horse belonging to a third party. Or you care for a horse in return for payment without owning it yourself. Record who actually used the animal, in what context and what arrangements existed about it.
Keep lesson confirmations, receipts, hire or care arrangements and messages about the use of the horse. These documents can help answer the question of which party legally comes into play. The name on an invoice is useful, but it need not fully describe all responsibilities.
Also note who gave instructions and what information about your experience was known. A lesson for beginners may create different practical expectations from a ride with experienced participants. This does not mean that experience automatically rules out or proves liability. The circumstances must be assessed as a whole.
If equipment is replaced after the accident, ask for its condition and the reason for the replacement to be recorded. Do not conclude without investigation that replacement amounts to an admission of a defect. Photographs, maintenance information and statements can help assess its significance.
Finally, give your representative all relevant terms and conditions, even if they state that you ride ‘at your own risk’. The validity, interpretation and effect of such a clause require a separate assessment. It is unwise to abandon an investigation into a possible claim for damages solely on the basis of those words.
Saddles, reins and other equipment
If equipment breaks or comes loose, a different legal basis may be relevant alongside liability for animals. Think of defective equipment, insufficient checks or incorrect fitting. Who is responsible depends on ownership, use, maintenance and the arrangements made.
Where possible, record the equipment and ask for it to be preserved. Note which part failed and who fitted or checked it. A repair may alter evidence; a timely request for preservation helps to keep later investigation possible. Do not return to an unsafe situation in order to reconstruct the incident.
Here too, the causal link is important. A worn part that had nothing to do with the fall is not automatically the legal cause. The assessment must show how the alleged defect contributed to the accident and which party was responsible for it.
Riding at your own risk does not automatically rule out a claim
Riding schools and organisers sometimes use terms on own risk or liability. Such a clause must be assessed for its content, applicability and legal validity. A general sentence on a sign does not automatically mean that all claims have lapsed.
Request the terms and conditions that applied when you booked the lesson or activity. Also keep the confirmation and the information you received beforehand. For a consumer, the rules on general terms and conditions may be important. An own-risk clause cannot be assessed in isolation from the relationship between the parties and the specific complaint.
The fact that horse riding involves risks may, however, be significant for the apportionment of the loss. That is a different question from a complete exclusion of liability. Ask the insurer to explain precisely what the rejection or reduction is based on.
Contributory negligence in a horse riding accident
If circumstances on the victim’s side contributed to the damage, contributory negligence may come into play. This involves looking at the causal contributions and the other circumstances. Voluntarily taking part in horse riding does not automatically lead to the same percentage reduction in every case.
Experience, instructions, the horse’s behaviour, the nature of the lesson and any safety measures may be relevant. The seriousness of mistakes and personal circumstances may also be taken into account in the legal assessment. A percentage without explanation is therefore insufficient to assess the proposal properly.
Ask whether the other party accepts liability but leaves part of the loss with you, or disputes liability altogether. That difference determines which questions remain open. A discussion about the apportionment must not obscure the fact that the correct legal basis and facts need to be established first.
Which losses may count after a horse riding accident
Where there is liability, personal injury loss may include medical costs not reimbursed elsewhere, travel, help at home and loss of income. In the case of serious injury, home adaptations, long-term care and aids may be needed. The loss must be linked to the limitations caused by the accident.
An employee gathers pay and sickness absence records; a self-employed person must show, among other things, which assignments and results were affected. Not every drop in turnover is automatically loss caused by the accident. Even with serious injuries, a substantiated comparison with the situation without the accident remains necessary.
Compensation for pain and suffering (smartengeld) covers pain, limitations and loss of enjoyment of life. It may also concern losing horse riding as an important activity. There is no fixed amount for a fall or a kick. The medical and personal consequences determine how the non-pecuniary loss is assessed.
Serious injury and future needs
A horse riding accident can lead to long-term or permanent limitations. In that case it is important to map out not only the acute phase but also the future. What care, support, aids and adaptations are needed? What work can be sustained in the long term? The answers often require several areas of expertise.
A medical expert can assess limitations and prognosis; an occupational expert examines what they mean for work. For care or home adaptations, other experts may be needed. A total figure without that substantiation may miss important needs or rest on unrealistic assumptions.
Public provisions and insurance payments must be considered together. Not every need is paid for by a single party, and double compensation must be avoided. At the same time, you should not be left with an unexplained financial gap. Ask for an overview of needs, provisions and remaining loss.
Insurance and the relationship between the parties involved
The keeper or riding school may have liability insurance. Cover is a separate question from legal liability. A dispute between the insurer and the insured does not automatically mean that the claim against the liable party disappears. It may, however, affect whether the loss can in practice be recovered.
You may have your own accident insurance, legal expenses insurance or other cover. Report the incident in accordance with the policy conditions and keep the responses. An accident insurance payment is generally not the same as compensation for your full personal injury loss. Have it assessed how the various payments relate to one another.
Do not agree, without checking, to give up all claims in exchange for a limited insurance payment. Ask what the payment covers and which rights, if any, would be extinguished. This is particularly important when the medical consequences are not yet clear.
Fictitious example of a fall during a riding lesson
A novice rider falls after a riding school horse bucks unexpectedly. The riding school states that everyone rides at their own risk. For the assessment, the use of the horse, the lesson arrangements, the instruction and the course of events are investigated. This example is fictitious and says nothing about any specific riding school.
The special rules on animals may be relevant, alongside a possible question about supervision. Next, it must be considered whether circumstances on the rider’s side affect the apportionment of the loss. A standard percentage is not assumed without investigation.
For the loss, medical records, time off work and care needs are gathered. If liability and part of the loss are sufficiently established, an advance payment can be discussed. A final settlement only follows once the consequences can be sufficiently quantified or uncertainties have been carefully taken into account.
Evidence checklist for a horse riding accident
- Note the horse, the location, the date and the people involved.
- Keep the booking, payment, lesson information and terms and conditions.
- Record who kept the horse and who used it for business purposes, as far as known.
- Ask witnesses to describe their own observations.
- Have footage and relevant equipment preserved as soon as possible.
- Gather medical information and an overview of costs and limitations.
Also describe your experience and the instructions given beforehand. Complete information prevents unexpected facts from emerging later. Have it assessed in good time which parties should be written to and which time limits or policy conditions are relevant.
The statutory rules on damage caused by animals
A horse riding accident turns on a special form of strict liability:
- Article 6:179 BW: the keeper of an animal is liable for the damage caused by the animal. The idea is that an animal’s own energy and unpredictability constitute a risk to be borne by the keeper. Fault on the part of the keeper is not required.
- Article 6:181 BW: if the animal is used in the course of a business, the liability under Article 6:179 BW shifts to the person carrying on that business. For a riding school or instruction business that uses the horse for lessons or hire, that is the business. The position of a livery yard is different: it generally only stables the horse and does not use it in its own business, so the private keeper remains liable. The decisive factor is who actually deploys the animal in their business operations. Paragraph 2 adds a further rule: if a business makes the animal available for use in another’s business, that other business is regarded as the liable party.
- Article 6:162 BW: in addition, an instructor or riding school may independently have acted unlawfully, for example by allocating an unsuitable horse, giving insufficient instruction or using defective equipment.
- Article 6:101 BW: contributory negligence. According to the Supreme Court of the Netherlands (Hoge Raad), the mere fact that you were on the horse voluntarily and with permission is not sufficient to extinguish the owner’s liability (HR 25 October 2002, ECLI:NL:HR:2002:AE7010, Manege Nieuw Amstelland). Where a riding lesson is involved and no one can be blamed for a lack of care, it does, as a rule, follow from the nature and purpose of the agreement that the horse’s unpredictable behaviour is partly at the rider’s risk. How far that reduction goes depends on the agreement and the other circumstances; there is no fixed percentage.
- Article 6:106 BW: compensation for pain and suffering in the case of physical injury.
The articles have been checked on wetten.overheid.nl. Whom you should hold liable depends on possession, business use and the role of the instructor; that question deserves investigation before you accept a rejection.
Frequently asked questions about damage caused by horses
Is the owner always liable if a horse kicks?
Not always. The special rules on animals may apply, but possession, business use, the course of events and the statutory conditions must be examined. Sometimes liability lies with a business user rather than the private keeper.
Does a riding lesson automatically mean fifty per cent contributory negligence?
No. There is no universal percentage for every riding lesson. The apportionment depends on the circumstances, including conduct, experience, instructions and the legal basis. A proposed reduction must be explained on its merits.
Can the instructor be responsible alongside the riding school?
A shortcoming in supervision may give rise to a separate legal basis. Which party is held liable on that basis depends on the employment and contractual relationship. The investigation must assess the specific instructions and safety measures, not merely the fact that someone fell.
Will my lost income be compensated?
Where there is liability, loss of income may count to the extent that it was caused by the injury. Substantiate your time off work and the financial consequences. Wages received, benefits and other relevant income are taken into account in the calculation.
Can I get an advance payment for care costs?
That is possible if liability and the loss concerned are sufficiently clear. Submit a substantiated request with estimates and any payments already received. An advance payment need not be a final settlement; check the terms agreed.
Who is the keeper of the horse?
Generally the person who keeps the horse for themselves, usually the owner. If the horse is kept at a livery yard or is used by a riding school for lessons, the business user may be liable under Article 6:181 BW alongside or instead of the keeper. Therefore ask about ownership, the livery agreement and the use of the horse.
I fell without the horse kicking or biting; can I still claim?
Possibly. The rule covers damage caused by the animal’s own energy, for example a horse that takes fright, rears or unexpectedly breaks away. Keep two questions separate. If the animal’s own energy was involved, the legal basis of Article 6:179 BW is in principle established, even if the movement was foreseeable. The fact that a rider must be alert to certain movements then plays a role in contributory negligence under Article 6:101 BW and in the risk that follows from the nature and purpose of a lesson agreement. This may reduce the compensation, but it does not extinguish the strict liability. Only if the damage was not caused by the animal’s own energy at all (the horse did exactly what you commanded and you lost your balance) is the legal basis itself called into question. The course of events is decisive.
Is my claim hopeless because I signed a waiver form?
Not necessarily. It must be assessed what exactly the form says, whether the clause was agreed, whether it is reasonable and whether it can be invoked in the circumstances. As against a consumer, a broad exclusion of liability for injury often does not hold up. Have the wording assessed.
Discuss your horse riding accident with Arslan Advocaten
Arslan Advocaten can investigate which party may be liable and what information is needed for your claim. Bring your lesson arrangements, terms and conditions, details of the horse and medical correspondence. We will discuss the possible approach and the associated fee arrangements.
Also read our general information on personal injury or get in touch about your own situation.
Related articles
- Amputation after an accident
- Spinal cord injury after an accident
- Dog bites and personal injury
- Liability: when is someone liable?
- An advance payment on your compensation
- Loss of income and loss of earning capacity
Sources and further information
- The Dutch judiciary on personal injury
- The Dutch Personal Injury Council (Letselschade Raad) on guidelines
