Abstract. The author examines whether the result obtained in the Dutch DES-case, namely a joint and several liability of the DES manufacturers, could be reached before Belgian courts. As the Belgian civil Code does not contain a rule comparable to article 6.99 of the Dutch civil Code, this seems impossible. Article 1382–1383 C.C. require a certain causal relationship. Consequently, if the damage is due to an unidentified member of a well-defined group, as in the DES-case, the plaintiff will not receive any compensation, because he fails to prove the causal link between the specific fault of a group-member and his own damage. The existing legal presumptions of causation could not relieve the onus of proof weighing on the DES-daughters either, as none of them applies to their specific case. Therefore it is hardly astonishing that in fields where victims are regularly confronted with the problem of an unidentified tortfeasor, such as pollution cases, traffic and hunting accidents, one has searched for alternatives and funds have been created in order to ascertain those victims of a compensation. By analogy with these funds the author proposes to create a guarantee fund intended to indemnify not only the DES-daughters, but all victims of unidentified drugmanufacturers.
European Review of Private Law