Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
VakO 5.10.1982/11626:81 AI generated

Insurance court denied disability compensation for shoulder periarthritis unrelated to the original workplace accident.

Case Number VakO 5.10.1982/11626:81
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 claim for disability compensation regarding shoulder periarthritis diagnosed one year after a workplace fall. The employee argued the inflammation was a consequence of the initial injury, while the insurer contended the condition was a separate, unrelated medical issue. The court ruled that no causal link existed between the accident and the subsequent inflammation, thereby rejecting the compensation request.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Insurance Act s. 10; Work Accident Act s. 10: Compensation is only payable for injuries directly caused by the accident; unrelated subsequent conditions like periarthritis do not qualify.

Keywords

AI generated
workplace accident disability compensation causal link shoulder periarthritis insurance liability medical causation injury exclusion

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Insurance Act s. 10
Work Accident Act s. 10
AI generated
kko-other_2009_2468
Supreme Court held work injury benefits for right elbow pain after August 2006 were not causally linked to November 2004 accident.
insurance_1980_6034-1979
Court allows partial compensation for shoulder injury where accident aggravated pre-existing arthritis and caused partial rotator cuff tear.
kko-other_1996_674
Workplace injury claim dismissed because employee's fall was caused by his own negligence, not employer fault.
kko-other_1998_2807
Work accident compensation allowed for fall on bicycle causing shoulder injury during business trip.
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 oli asennustyössä jyrkällä ja liukkaalla rinteellä liukastunut ja kaatunut maahan lyöden oikean olkapäänsä seurauksin, että siihen oli tullut ruhjevamma. Noin vuoden kuluttua olkapäässä, joka tapaturman jälkeen oli ollut kivulias, oli todettu olkanivelen ympärystulehdus. VAKO epäsi korvauksen olkanivelen ympärystulehduksesta. VI -jaosto KKO 27.9.1983=VAKO (Lääkintöhallitus: Kettunen)