Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
VakO 15.9.1967/6223:66 AI generated

Voluntary fire brigade member injured at factory fire not entitled to state compensation under fire protection law.

Case Number VakO 15.9.1967/6223:66
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Finland (FI)
Decision Date
Outcome Dismissed
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The court dismissed the claim for state compensation by a volunteer firefighter injured while extinguishing a factory fire. Although the factory paid hourly wages and an alert bonus, the court found no employment relationship existed between the member and the factory owner. Consequently, compensation must be provided under the Fire Protection Act from state funds, which does not apply to this specific voluntary service context.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Palolain 45 §; Nyk. Laki paloja pelastustoimesta 35 §: A volunteer fire brigade member is not entitled to state compensation for injuries sustained during a factory fire if no employment relationship exists with the factory owner, as compensation is strictly limited to state-funded scenarios defined by the Fire Protection Act.

Keywords

AI generated
voluntary fire brigade state compensation employment relationship fire protection law injury compensation factory fire hourly wage

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Palolain 45 §
Korvaus vahingoittumisesta on suoritettava palolain 45 §:n nojalla valtion varoista.
Nyk. Laki paloja pelastustoimesta 35 §

Cited Case Law

AI generated
KKO 2.9.1969:6223
AI generated
insurance_1964_6407-1963
Temporary firefighter injured playing football during work hours; court rules injury is compensable work accident.
insurance_1969_6463-1968
Firefighter without employment contract receives state compensation under fire safety law for work injury.
insurance_1976_1988-1976
Workplace injury during coffee break denied as work accident due to lack of work-related duty.
insurance_1969_983-1969
Voluntary firefighter death compensation claim dismissed as no employment relationship existed at time of death.
insurance_2002_447-2001
Work accident coverage granted when employee participated in employer-approved sports competition during work hours.

Need to analyze how this precedent applies to your matter?

Cross-reference this judgment against statutes, commentaries, and subsequent citing case law inside Legislator AI.

Open in Legislator →

Full text

Palomies kuului vapaaehtoiseen palokuntaan, joka toimi samalla tehdaspalokuntana. Tehdas suoritti palokunnan jäsenille sammutustöihin osallistumisesta tuntipalkkaa sekä hälytysrahaa. Palokunta toimi myös kunnan palokuntana ja kunta suoritti palokunnalle osan palotoimen kustannuksista. Palomies oli osallistunut tehtaalla syttyneen tulipalon sammutustyöhön ja vahingoittunut. KKO 2.9.1969: Palomies ei vapaaehtoisen palokunnan jäsenenä ollut työsuhteessa tehtaan omistamaan yhtiöön, vaikka viimeksi mainittu maksoikin sammutustöihin osallistumisesta tuntipalkkaa ja hälytysrahaa. Korvaus vahingoittumisesta on suoritettava palolain 45 §:n nojalla valtion varoista. (Nyk. Laki paloja pelastustoimesta 35§)