Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
VakO 29.8.1980/10798:78 AI generated

Insurance court dismissed claim for work-related hearing loss when medical evidence failed to prove causation by employer.

Case Number VakO 29.8.1980/10798:78
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Finland (FI)
Decision Date
Outcome Dismissed
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The Insurance Court dismissed the employee's claim for compensation regarding hearing loss sustained during work from 1973 to 1976. Although the employee reported worsening hearing in 1973 and subsequent tests confirmed inner ear damage, the court found no probable causal link to the employer's work. Consequently, the court set aside the previous decision and exempted the insurance company from liability.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Insurance Act; Workmen's Compensation Act: An insurance company is not liable for work-related hearing loss if medical evidence fails to establish a probable causal connection between the injury and the employer's work activities.

Keywords

AI generated
work-related hearing loss causation burden of proof insurance liability exemption inner ear damage employer work activities

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Insurance Act
Workmen's Compensation Act
AI generated
insurance_1977_1781-1977
Insurance court denies hearing on noise-induced hearing loss compensation due to lack of procedural standing.
insurance_1977_6687-1976
Insurance court dismisses claim where late notice caused by minor's age lacks serious reasons.
insurance_1980_10938-1979
Insurance court dismissed claim for work-related injury compensation due to lack of direct causal link between repetitive lifting and shoulder inflammation.
insurance_1980_9028-1979
Noise-induced hearing loss compensation denied due to insufficient hearing protection usage during high-decibel work periods.
insurance_1984_3913-1983
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

Työntekijä oli ollut huhtikuusta 1973 marraskuuhun 1976 erään työnantajan kivenporaustyössä ja ilmoittanut kuulonsa huonontuneen vuonna 1973. Vuonna 1975 ja 1978 suoritetuissa tutkimuksissa hänellä todettiin kummassakin korvassa sisäkorvatyyppinen kuulonalennus. VAKO määräsi vakuutusyhtiön suorittamaan korvauksen mainitun työnantaja vakuutuksen perusteella. VI -jaosto KKO 13.1.1984: Lääketieteellisen selvityksen perusteella ei ollut todennäköistä, että kuulonalennus olisi aiheutunut mainitun työnantajan työstä. KKO kumosi VAKO:n päätöksen ja vapautti vakuutusyhtiön korvausvelvollisuudesta. (Lääkintöhallitus: PalvaKärjä)