Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
VakO 11.12.1979/5642:78 AI generated

Court allows insurance payout for aggravated neck injury caused by accident, not pre-existing disease.

Case Number VakO 11.12.1979/5642:78
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Finland (FI)
Decision Date
Outcome Allowed / Granted
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The court ruled that the insured's neck injury was an aggravation of a pre-existing condition triggered by an accident, mandating insurance compensation. The insurer argued the injury stemmed solely from the insured's underlying disease, but the court found the accident was the decisive factor. Consequently, the court ordered the payment of benefits for the aggravated condition.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Insurance Act s. 10; Accident Liability Act s. 2: An injury is considered an aggravation of a pre-existing condition if an accident triggers a worsening of the condition, entitling the insured to compensation for the aggravated portion.

Keywords

AI generated
aggravation of pre-existing condition accident liability insurance neck injury compensation causation in insurance insurance court decision

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Insurance Act s. 10
Accident Liability Act s. 2

Cited Case Law

AI generated
KKO 3.12.1982:5642
AI generated
insurance_1982_10882-1981
Insurance court denied disability benefits for shoulder and neck injuries after initial hand injury compensation was granted.
kko-precedent_2007_60
Supreme Court allows compensation for chronic neck pain aggravated by accident despite pre-existing degeneration.
kko-other_2013_31
Supreme Court dismissed claim that neck pain was causally linked to a 2007 traffic accident.
insurance_1982_734-1981
Insurance court dismissed claim for work injury compensation due to lack of direct causal link between accident and specific medical findings.
kko-other_2012_2460
Supreme Court dismissed claim for compensation where pain in left upper limb was not causally linked to the 2007 accident.

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, joka poti kaularangan nikamarikkoa, oli sähkökaapin kaaduttua saanut kiertonikaman hampaan, IV ja VIII rintanikaman ja oikean ulkokehräsluun murtumat. VAKO epäsi korvauksen kaularangan nikamarikosta. IV -jaosto KKO 3.12.1982: Kaularangan nikamarikko oli tapaturmasta pahentunut ja sairauden pahenemisesta määrättiin maksettavaksi korvaus. (Lääkintöhallitus: Salenius-Larmi)