Menu

Filter by
content
PONT Data&Privacy

0

ECLI:NL:RBNNE:2025:1824

Wahv. The (auxiliary) clutch. The wear indicator should be in the green when engaged. If it is not, the clutch should be replaced. Although the photo of the conduct was taken from an angle, it still shows that the wear indicator is in the red box, which means that the clutch is worn out and should be replaced. That the wear indicator o...

North Netherlands District Court 13 May 2025

Case law - Rulings

ECLI:NL:RBNNE:2025:1824 text/xml public 2025-05-13T18:16:18 2025-05-13 Judicial Council en North Netherlands District Court 2025-04-22 11340491 BU VERZ 24-2347 Excerpt Oral pronunciation EN Leeuwarden Administrative law; Administrative criminal law Jurisprudence.com http://deeplink.rechtspraak.nl/uitspraak?id=ECLI:NL:RBNNE:2025:1824 text/html public 2025-05-13T18:12:32 2025-05-13 Judicial Council en ECLI:NL:RBNNE:2025:1824 Rechtbank Noord-Nederland , 22-04-2025 / 11340491 BU VERZ 24-2347
Wahv. The (auxiliary) clutch. The wear indicator should be in green when engaged. If it is not, the clutch should be replaced. Although the photo of the conduct was taken from an angle, it still shows that the wear indicator is in the red box, which means that the clutch is worn out and should be replaced. The fact that the wear indicator on the new clutch is also against the red box does not make this different, as this conduct is about the old auxiliary clutch and the subdistrict court is only looking at that old clutch.

Place of session Leeuwarden

Administrative Law

decision number: 261340855

case number: 11340491 BU VERZ 24-2347

Minutes of the oral verdict given at the public hearing of April 22, 2025

in the matter of
[person concerned] (the subject),
who lives in [place of residence] .

1. A fine has been imposed on the person concerned pursuant to the Administrative Enforcement of Traffic Regulations Act (Wahv). The traffic violation for which the fine was imposed is: 'the (auxiliary) coupling does not meet the requirements', performed on September 30, 2023, at 09:56 a.m., on the Schoterlandseweg in Jubbega, municipality of Heerenveen, with a trailer (80 km/h), with registration number [license plate] . The fine imposed is € 289.00 (including administration costs).
1.1.
The person concerned appealed the fine to the public prosecutor. The latter declared the appeal unfounded. The Respondent appealed that decision to the district court.
1.2.
The Subdistrict Court heard the appeal at the hearing on April 22, 2025. Present at the hearing were the person involved and, representing the public prosecutor, Mr. S. Bayram (hereinafter: the representative).
1.3.
At the conclusion of the hearing, the subdistrict court judge ruled immediately.

2. De kantonrechter beoordeelt het beroep aan de hand van de beroepsgronden van betrokkene. Hij oordeelt dat het beroep ongegrond is. De kantonrechter zal hierna uitleggen waarom hij dat doet.

Positions

3. The Respondent disputes the conduct complained of and raises a defense. He has argued that he mounted a new clutch after the stop and that he himself saw little difference from the old clutch for which he received this fine. The involved party does not understand how it can be determined from the indicator (the sticker on the clutch) that the clutch is actually worn out. According to the person concerned, this should be measured. Indeed, on his new clutch, just as on the old clutch photographed by the reporting officer, the indicator is also against the red box. From his own experience hitching up the trailer, the person concerned can already tell when a clutch is worn out; he is on the road daily as a truck driver. As a result, he is always alert to hitching.
3.1
The representative has argued that the individual has not sufficiently substantiated that the auxiliary clutch is not worn out and that the conduct can be sufficiently established based on the available data. In addition, she argued that a measurement was not required and that the visual inspection by the reporting officer was sufficient. The representative requested the district judge to declare the appeal unfounded.

Considerations

4. In Wahv cases, the statement of the official provides, in principle, a sufficient basis for establishing that the conduct was committed. This is different if the person involved brings forward facts and circumstances specific to his case that give reason to doubt the correctness of one or more parts of the statement or if such facts and circumstances appear from the file.
4.1
From the statement of the verbalisant as included in the case record, it appears that the wear indicator present on the coupling of the trailer indicated that the coupling was worn out. The verbalizer states that the trailer was correctly coupled, but that the indicator indicated severe degree of wear, which is not in accordance with the provisions of Article 5.13.66, second paragraph, of the Vehicle Regulations. He refers to the photographs of the conduct. The person in question was stopped and made the following statement: "I didn't know."
4.2
Article 5.13.66, second paragraph, of the Vehicle Regulations stipulates that the coupling and towing triangle or drawbar of trailers must be properly attached and may not be torn, seriously deformed, broken or excessively worn. The Subdistrict Court considered that the photos of the conduct show the coupling of the trailer of the person concerned, with the wear indicator on it. This indicator is intended to check the wear of the coupling. The clerk's research on the Internet revealed that this indicator should be in green when in the hitched position. If it is not, the clutch should be replaced.
4.3
Although the photo of the conduct was taken from an angle, it still shows that the wear indicator is in the red box, implying that the clutch is worn out and should be replaced. The respondent argued that he replaced his clutch after the fine, and that it was little different from the old clutch. He submitted a photo of the new clutch, showing the wear indicator. The Subdistrict Court considered that the photo shows that the wear indicator falls just inside the green box.
4.4
Although he agrees with the person concerned that it is a small difference, the conduct can be sufficiently established from the photographs of the conduct. The fact that the wear indicator on the new clutch is also against the red box does not make this any different, since this conduct is about the old auxiliary clutch and the Subdistrict Court is only looking at that old clutch. All in all, he finds that the fine was rightly imposed on the person concerned. Furthermore, the Subdistrict Court sees no reason to moderate the fine in the circumstances cited by the person concerned.

De kantonrechter verklaart het beroep ongegrond.

Of which official report,

R. de Hoop, registrar Mr. P.G. Wijtsma, district judge

If you disagree with the decision on your appeal, you may appeal to the

court of appeal Arnhem - Leeuwarden within six weeks from the date of sending this decision below, but only if:

a. the administrative fine imposed on you exceeds €110.00, or

b. your appeal was declared inadmissible because you did not provide security (or did not do so in time).

The (higher) notice of appeal must be submitted to the District Court of Noord-Nederland, Administrative Law Division, Groningen location (Postbus 150, 9700 AD Groningen). You should include the case number.

The law assumes an entirely written procedure, unless a hearing was expressly requested by you in the notice of appeal or appeal.

Copy sent to parties on:

Share article