Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
VakO 29.9.1981/4329:80 AI generated

Insurance court denied disability benefits for back injury but allowed compensation for hip fracture caused by the accident.

Case Number VakO 29.9.1981/4329:80
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Finland (FI)
Decision Date
Outcome Partially Allowed
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The Insurance Court denied disability benefits for the employee's back injury but granted compensation for the hip fracture. The court found that while the back injury was a pre-existing condition, the hip fracture was a direct consequence of the 1973 accident. Consequently, benefits were awarded only for the hip fracture, not the back injury.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Insurance Act; Disability Insurance Act: Pre-existing conditions do not entitle claimants to disability benefits, but injuries directly caused by the accident remain compensable even if they occur in a different body part.

Keywords

AI generated
pre-existing condition disability benefits accident causation compensation eligibility insurance liability

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Insurance Act
Disability Insurance Act

Cited Case Law

AI generated
KKO 30.12.1983:4329
AI generated
insurance_1977_2474-1976
Insurance court awards disability compensation for repetitive hand compression and shoulder rotation causing occupational disease.
insurance_1980_908-1980
Insurance court dismissed claim for disability benefits when injury occurred during voluntary work without employer fault.
insurance_1978_10140-1977
Insurance court denied worker's compensation for carpal tunnel and shoulder inflammation caused by flour bag handling.
insurance_1980_6034-1979
Court allows partial compensation for shoulder injury where accident aggravated pre-existing arthritis and caused partial rotator cuff tear.
insurance_1980_1296-1979
Work injury compensation allowed for arthritis and cartilage softening caused by the 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, jolla oli ollut ristiselkävaivoja oli vuonna 1973 työssä joutunut painavien kuivatussylintereiden väliin puristuksiin ja saanut lantion murtuman sekä virtsaputken repeämän. Sittemmin hänellä oli todettu lannerankarikkoa ja oikean lonkan rikkoa. VAKO epäsi korvauksen rikkosairauksista. II -jaosto KKO 30.12.1983: Lannerankarikko ei oikeuttanut korvaukseen. Oikean lonkan nivelrikko oli tapaturman seuraus ja korvattava. (Lääkintöhallitus: Slätis)