Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
VakO 21.6.1990/4377:89 AI generated

Insurance court dismisses claim for repair costs as they are not covered medical or property damage expenses.

Case Number VakO 21.6.1990/4377:89
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 claimant's request for reimbursement of repair costs incurred to free the injured farmer from a binding device. The court determined these expenses did not qualify as medical treatment costs or damage to property under the Farmers' Accident Insurance Act. Consequently, the decision of the Accident Board was upheld without modification.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Tapaturmavakuutuslaki 1973; Maatalousyrittäjien tapaturmavakuutuslaki 1973: Repair costs for equipment used to free an injured person are not compensable unless explicitly defined as medical treatment or property damage under the specific insurance statutes.

Keywords

AI generated
farmers accident insurance repair cost exclusion medical treatment definition property damage scope accident compensation limits

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Tapaturmavakuutuslaki 1973
Maatalousyrittäjien tapaturmavakuutuslaki 1973
AI generated
insurance_2015_1690-2014
Insurance court denied accident pension due to lack of proven causal link between symptoms and accident.
kko-other_2000_288
Supreme Court dismisses appeal regarding intentional injury claim where victim's own negligence caused injuries.
insurance_1994_7809-1993
Work injury claim dismissed because no compensable disability or illness resulted from the fall.
insurance_2018_5483-2016
Insurance court ruled voluntary insurance compensation must be deducted from specific crime compensation categories, not the total sum.
insurance_2003_6472-2002
Insurance court awarded legal fees to an assistant in a criminal compensation case regarding foreign crime.

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

Leikkuupuimuria oli työtapaturman yhteydessä jouduttu rikkomaan vahingoittuneen saamiseksi irti. Korjauskustannuksista ei ollut suoritettava korvausta maatalousyrittäjien tapaturmavakuutuslain perusteella, koska korjauskuluja ei voitu pitää tapaturmavamman sairaanhoitokuluina eikä myöskään sellaisina tapaturmassa rikkoutuneen esineen kuluina, joiden korvattavuudesta on säädetty erikseen tapaturmavakuutuslaissa. Tapaturmalautakunnan päätöstä ei muutettu. VI-jaosto