Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
VakO 31.10.1978/6648:77 AI generated

Work injury claim partially allowed when pre-existing condition was aggravated by the accident.

Case Number VakO 31.10.1978/6648:77
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Finland (FI)
Decision Date
Outcome Partially Allowed
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The court ruled that while the partial dislocation and arthritis were pre-existing conditions, the work accident aggravated them, warranting partial compensation. The employee suffered a shoulder injury during a fall, leading to a partial dislocation and subsequent inflammation, which the insurer initially denied. The court determined that the accident was the proximate cause of the inflammatory condition, entitling the employee to half the damages.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

s. 10 of the Workmen's Compensation Act 1976; s. 11 of the Workmen's Compensation Act 1976: An accident that aggravates a pre-existing condition constitutes a compensable work injury to the extent of the aggravation.

Keywords

AI generated
work injury compensation pre-existing condition aggravation of injury partial dislocation arthritis causation

Cited Legislation

AI generated
s. 10 of the Workmen's Compensation Act 1976
s. 11 of the Workmen's Compensation Act 1976

Cited Case Law

AI generated
KKO 17.9.1982:17
AI generated
insurance_1980_6034-1979
Court allows partial compensation for shoulder injury where accident aggravated pre-existing arthritis and caused partial rotator cuff tear.
insurance_2018_5037-2016
Insurance court allows partial claim by interpreting six-week compensation period to include the onset day.
insurance_1977_1113-1977
Court rules death from stomach ulcer is a work injury consequence under Finnish Insurance Act.
insurance_1980_1334-1980
Insurance court allows worker's compensation for chronic shoulder pain caused by a 1966 fall.
insurance_1981_125-1980
Insurance court denied compensation for a 1942-1944 work injury due to lack of statutory coverage at the time.

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

Työntekijä oli joulukuussa 1976 työssä altaaseen laskeutuessaan horjahtanut ja tasapainoa hakiessaan satuttanut oikean olkapäänsä altaan reunaan. Olkapäässä havaittiin kolahdusvamma ja sittemmin siinä todettiin olkanivelen ympärystulehdus sekä olkalisäke-solisluunivelen osittainen sijoiltaanmeno ja nivelrikko. VAKO epäsi korvauksen näistä sairauksista. III -jaosto KKO 17.9.1982: Oikean olkapään olkalisä-solisluunivelen osittainen sijoiltaanmeno ja nivelrikko eivät olleet työtapaturman seurauksia, vaan sitä ennen syntyneitä. Niiden johdosta tapaturma oli kuitenkin ollut omiaan aiheuttamaan olkanivelen ympärystulehduksena ilmenevän taudinkuvan, josta puolet oli korvattava tapaturman seurauksena. (Lääkintöhallitus: Larmi)