Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
VakO 15.5.1979/5000:78 AI generated

Insurance court awards occupational disease compensation for Achilles tendonitis caused by repetitive work pressure.

Case Number VakO 15.5.1979/5000:78
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Finland (FI)
Decision Date
Outcome Allowed / Granted
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The Insurance Court ordered the insurer to pay compensation for the claimant's Achilles tendonitis, which was medically linked to repetitive work pressure. The claimant argued that the injury resulted from a physical factor inherent to his job duties since 1971, while the insurer initially denied the claim. The court accepted the medical evidence and applied the Occupational Disease Act to grant benefits as a recognized occupational disease.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Ammattitautiasetus 5 § 1 kohta; The court holds that repetitive physical pressure during employment constitutes a qualifying occupational factor for disease recognition under the Occupational Disease Act.

Keywords

AI generated
occupational disease recognition Achilles tendonitis repetitive physical pressure Insurance Court decision work-related injury compensation

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Occupational Disease Act Section 5, Paragraph 1
AI generated
insurance_1983_9101-1981
Occupational disease compensation denied; court ruled symptoms stemmed from increased workload rather than physical factors.
insurance_1980_5594-1979
Insurance court dismissed disability claim for car washer injured by repetitive strain and heavy lifting.
insurance_1979_8067-1978
Finger tendonitis from manual typing work is compensable as an occupational disease under Finnish law.
insurance_1979_5903-1974
Occupational disease compensation granted for repetitive strain injury from ironing despite employer denial.
insurance_1980_10836-1979
Insurance court dismissed claim for occupational disease compensation due to lack of causal link between work and injury.

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

Kassanhoitaja oli vuodesta 1971 työssään joutunut jatkuvasti oikealla jalallaan painamaan poljinta tavarahihnan liikuttamiseksi. Helmikuussa 1978 hänellä todettiin oikean akillesjänteen tulehdus. VAKO epäsi korvauksen. IV -jaosto KKO 27.5.1982: Sairaus oli ilmeisesti aiheutunut työhön liittyvästä fysikaalisesta tekijästä. Korvaus määrättiin suoritettavaksi ammattitautiasetuksen 5 §:n 1 kohdan perusteella ammattitautina. (Lääkintöhallitus: Larmi)