Family liability insurance: damage caused by a child, dog bites, borrowed items

In short

Family liability insurance (assurance RC familiale / RC vie privée, Dutch familiale verzekering) is not compulsory, but if you have it, it must meet the minimum conditions of the Royal Decree of 12.1.1984. The insurer cannot rely on an exclusion that the decree does not list.

Parents are liable for damage caused by a child under 16 even without any fault of their own (Civil Code art. 6.12; events on or after 1.1.2025). For older events, former art. 1384 and a rebuttable presumption of fault apply.

The “intentional act” defence is read narrowly. The insurer must prove that the damage was caused knowingly and wilfully. A child’s intentional act does not remove cover for the parents’ own liability either.

The keeper of a dog is liable for the damage it causes without fault. The fact that the dog was never aggressive before does not change this. Dogs are not among the animals that may be excluded from family liability cover.

Damage to items you borrowed, hired or were entrusted with is excluded in most policies, and the Ombudsman finds most of these refusals justified. Check whether your policy has an extension for “entrusted property”.

Family liability insurance comes into play when you or someone living in your household causes damage to another person in private life. About 75% of Belgian households reportedly have this cover (Assuralia spokesperson to RTBF, 2023). Disputes tend to arise in three areas: children’s behaviour, pets and other people’s property.

First: how does family liability insurance work?

Who is insured? The policyholder and the spouse or partner living with them, everyone living in the household (including students living elsewhere for their studies), domestic staff in private service and people who look after your children or animals outside a professional activity (RD 12.1.1984, art. 3). For children of separated parents, the policy that applies depends on where the child actually lives. Residence fixed by a court order is not decisive on its own (Cass. 28.1.2019, C.18.0395.F).
Minimum cover: €12,394,676.24 for bodily injury and €619,733.81 for property damage, per event. These amounts are indexed and many policies offer higher limits (art. 5).
The excess (franchise) can be agreed freely (art. 5). On the market you see amounts such as €250 (KBC/CBC) or €266.09 (AXA, 12/2025) for property damage. Some policies apply no excess to bodily injury.
Permitted exclusions are listed exhaustively in article 6 of the decree. Examples: liability subject to compulsory insurance (e.g. motor vehicles), the insureds’ own losses, property and animals in the insured’s custody, hunting, saddle horses.
The injured party can claim directly from the insurer (Insurance Act, art. 150). In optional liability insurance, defences based on facts after the loss, such as late notification, cannot be raised against the injured party (art. 151 §2).

My child broke a TV at a friend’s house and the insurer says it was intentional: what happens?

In most cases the damage is paid by your family liability insurance. The insurer’s “intentional act” defence only succeeds under narrow conditions. The outcome depends on the date of the event and the child’s age.

Who is liable?

If the event occurred on or after 1.1.2025, Book 6 of the Civil Code applies. A child under 12 is not personally liable (art. 6.9). Parents are liable without fault for damage caused to others by a child under 16 through the child’s fault or another ground of liability (art. 6.12, para. 1). Proving that you raised or supervised the child well does not release you. The fact that a child under 12 cannot be held personally liable does not affect the parents’ liability; the explanatory memorandum says so expressly (parliamentary document DOC 55 3213/001, p. 65). For a child aged 16 or 17, the parent is not liable if they prove that the damage was not caused by their own fault (art. 6.12, para. 2).
If the event occurred before 1.1.2025, former art. 1384, para. 2 applies. Parents were liable on the basis of a presumption of fault that they could rebut by proving good upbringing and supervision. The child’s own liability depended on “discernment”, generally looked for from around age 7.

When is the insurer’s “intentional act” defence justified?

By law, the insurer does not have to cover a person who caused the loss intentionally (Insurance Act, art. 62). But intent requires the will to cause the damage itself. A deliberate action is not enough on its own (Cass. 3.11.2022, C.21.0407.F). Breaking the screen while playing ball in the room is not intentional. Throwing something at the screen in anger may be.
The insurer bears the burden of proving intent. The Court of Cassation upheld an appeal ruling to that effect (Cass. 6.9.2013, C.12.0360.F).
Even if the child acted intentionally, the parents’ own liability for the child remains covered. The decree does not allow cover to be excluded for the intentional act of a person for whom the insured is liable (Cass. 25.3.2003, P.02.1097.N).
Since 1.1.2025, damage caused intentionally or through gross fault by a minor cannot be raised against the injured party in family liability insurance (Insurance Act, art. 151 §2, last paragraph, added by art. 37 of the Act of 7.2.2024). In other words, the insurer cannot use the intent defence against your friend’s family. Justel gives 1.1.2025 as the date of entry into force, and the Act contains no separate transitional rule for this provision, so it does not apply to events before 1.1.2025; for those events, the 2003 Cassation ruling above still protects the parents’ cover. The rule was introduced to protect injured parties instead of making family liability insurance compulsory (DOC 55 3213/004, pp. 63-64).
After paying, the insurer may claim against the minor; the minor is an insured under the parents’ policy for this purpose (Cass. 11.1.2010, C.07.0434.F). Recourse requires that the policy reserves this right and that the insurer notifies its intention to claim as soon as it knows the facts; otherwise the right of recourse is lost (Insurance Act, art. 152). This recourse is limited: in full up to €11,000 of net payments, plus half of the amount above that, with a maximum of €31,000 (RD 12.1.1984, art. 7). Gross fault can only be excluded if it is listed expressly and exhaustively in the general conditions and the child has reached the age of discernment (art. 6, 6°). Some policies apply the intent exclusion only to insureds aged 16 or over (e.g. Allianz Family Plan).

Who pays the excess? The excess is the part you bear in your relationship with your insurer. The Act states expressly that in compulsory liability insurance an excess cannot be raised against the injured party (art. 151 §1). Paragraph 2, which governs optional insurance such as family liability, does not mention the excess. We found no Court of Cassation ruling on whether the excess can be deducted from the injured party’s claim. In practice the insurer either pays the injured party net of the excess and you pay the difference, or pays everything and recovers the excess from you. If the injured party was paid by their own contents insurance, that insurer will then claim from your family liability insurer.

What to do: Notify the event in writing as soon as possible and within the period in your policy. Ask for the facts behind any allegation of intent in writing. If necessary, contact the Ombudsman.

My dog slipped its lead and bit someone: what does family liability insurance pay?

You are liable even if you were not at fault. Your family liability insurance pays the person’s medical costs, loss of income and non-pecuniary damage within the policy limits.

Liability:

On or after 1.1.2025: the keeper (gardien) of an animal is liable without fault for the damage it causes. The keeper is the person with independent power of direction and control over the animal, and the owner is presumed to be the keeper unless proven otherwise (Civil Code art. 6.17).
Before 1.1.2025: under former art. 1385, the owner or the person using the animal at the time was liable without fault, even if the animal had escaped. The owner could only escape by proving an external cause: force majeure, the act of a third party or the victim’s own fault. Under Court of Cassation case law, there was no liability where the victim caused the damage through their own fault and the animal behaved normally and foreseeably. Book 6 deliberately dropped that rule. Liability is now shared in such a case, and the keeper can no longer escape by relying on force majeure or a third party’s act; after paying, the keeper claims against the third party (explanatory memorandum, DOC 55 3213/001, pp. 80-81).
“It never attacked anyone before” does not remove liability in either period, because no fault is required. If the injured person provoked the dog, their own share can reduce the compensation (art. 6.20 §1). If the injured person is under 12, their compensation cannot be reduced (art. 6.20 §4).

Insurance cover:

Dogs are not on the decree’s list of exclusions. Only saddle horses owned by the insured and non-domestic animals may be excluded (RD 12.1.1984, art. 6, 17°). Damage caused by a dog to third parties is therefore covered. This conclusion is an interpretation of the wording of the decree.
If the damage occurred during a professional activity, the insurer may argue that it falls outside private life. The Liège Court of Appeal ruled out family liability cover for a dog that attacked during a paid performance (5.1.2015, 2014/RG/138). According to the court, where the policy gives no definition, a professional activity is one carried out for profit with a certain regularity; it can be a side activity but not merely occasional. In that case the insured and the injured party had to prove that the event belonged to private life. If, for example, you walk dogs regularly for payment, that activity may fall outside your family liability cover and requires professional liability insurance.
The Court of Cassation upheld an appeal ruling holding that private life must be understood broadly and that an event occurring during a professional activity can still be covered if it does not arise from the professional activity itself (Cass. 6.9.2013, C.12.0360.F). Where the line falls depends on the circumstances.
The heads of bodily injury (medical costs, temporary and permanent incapacity, non-pecuniary damage) are calculated under the rules explained in the injury compensation guide. The injured person’s health insurance fund (mutualité) recovers what it paid from your insurer (Coordinated Act of 14.7.1994, art. 136 §2).

What to do: Notify your insurer straight away, do not sign anything accepting the injured person’s claim, and keep witness details and veterinary records. Belgium has no general compulsory liability insurance for all dog owners; the FSMA list of compulsory insurances contains no such heading.

I dropped a camera I borrowed from a friend: will the insurance pay?

In most policies it will not, because the item was in your custody. This refusal is lawful. The situation is different if your policy has an “entrusted property” extension.

Your liability: A borrower must look after the item with reasonable care. If you dropped and broke it, you owe your friend compensation (former Civil Code art. 1880 et seq., loan for use, prêt à usage). You are not liable for wear resulting only from normal use (art. 1884).
The insurer’s basis: The decree allows the exclusion of damage to movable property in the insured’s custody (sous sa garde) (RD 12.1.1984, art. 6, 7°). According to the Insurance Ombudsman, about 25% of liability files in 2025 concerned such refusals. The Ombudsman found most refusals justified in examples such as a tool borrowed from a neighbour or a friend’s camera.
Does a short loan make a difference? Usually not. Custody (garde) lies with the person who has independent power of direction and control over the item for their own account (Civil Code art. 6.16; Court of Cassation case law). If you took the item to use it, that power passes to you even for a few hours. If the owner was standing next to you and handed you the camera for a quick look, direction and control may have stayed with the owner. We found no published ruling applying this distinction to the family liability exclusion; ask the insurer to explain in its refusal why custody passed to you.
The “contractual liability” defence: Family liability insurance covers non-contractual liability (art. 1). Since 1.1.2025, an injured party may rely on non-contractual liability rules even where there is a contract (Civil Code art. 6.3). The FSMA Insurance Commission noted that this could widen cover. The borrower can then still raise defences arising from the contract (e.g. normal wear and tear) (art. 6.3 §1, para. 2). The custody exclusion, however, depends not on the legal basis of the claim but on the damaged item being in your custody, so it applies whatever rule the injured party relies on.
Extensions: Some policies cover borrowed or hired items. For example, the KBC/CBC Police familiale covers property you do not own up to €15,000. AXA’s “Biens loués ou confiés” option goes up to €50,000 with a €500 excess. Check the special conditions of your policy.

Without cover, you will need to settle the matter directly with your friend. The age and wear of the item affect the amount owed.

Checklist

Did the event happen before or after 1.1.2025? (Book 6 or former art. 1384-1385?)
Is the person who caused the damage an “insured” under the policy? (household member, student, carer)
Have I notified the event in writing within the policy period?
If the insurer relies on an exclusion, is it listed in art. 6 of the RD of 12.1.1984 and written expressly in the general conditions?
If intent is alleged, which facts does the insurer rely on, and can it prove the damage was intended?
What is the excess and who will pay it?
Do I have an extension for entrusted or borrowed items?
Has the injured party’s own insurer already paid?

Sources

This guide is general information, not legal advice. Current as of 09.10.2026.