Austrian OGH: No Compensation for Trauma after Plane Crashes into House

May 9, 2025 Benn-Ibler Rechtsanwälte

The Austrian Supreme Court (Oberster Gerichtshof, hereinafter OGH) dealt with the question of whether psychological distress following massive damage to property (in this case caused by a small aircraft crashing into a residential building) is eligible for compensation.

On 31 July 2022, a small aircraft piloted by the first defendant and owned by the second defendant crashed into the roof of the single-family house of the two plaintiffs, who were not home at the time of the accident. The house was so badly damaged that it was uninhabitable for around six months. Both plaintiffs suffered psychological effects to a clinical extent, as they imagined what might have happened if they had been at home at the time of the accident. In addition, they began to suffer from existential fears because of the damage to their house.

Each of the plaintiffs claimed over EUR 19,000 in compensation for pain and suffering, as well as a declaration that the defendants were liable for all long-term and permanent consequences. However, the defendants argued that psychological trauma was only compensable in cases involving the loss of close relatives or direct involvement in an accident, neither of which applied here.

The court of first instance recognised the psychological trauma experienced by the plaintiffs and awarded them compensation for pain and suffering, albeit in a reduced amount. The court considered the crash to be an exceptionally traumatic experience, and awarding compensation was justifiable.

However, the court of appeal largely upheld the defendant and overturned the lower court’s ruling to a large extent, holding that the plaintiffs had not been directly involved in the accident, as they were not present at the scene and had no family relationship with the injured parties, nor did the extensive damage to the house constitute a special reason for awarding damages for psychological trauma.

The OGH has recently confirmed the court of appeal’s opinion, stating that compensation for psychological trauma is only payable in cases involving very close personal relationships (such as the killing or serious injury of close relatives), or where a third party is directly involved in the accident. Mere damage to property, even if serious and occurring in one’s highly personal sphere, is insufficient to render consequential psychological impact compensable. According to the OGH, the possibility of something like that happening is part of the general risk of life and does not justify a claim.

OGH 2 Ob 12/25 (25.03.2025)