Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
VakO 15.2.2000/10042:98 AI generated

Insurance court awards compensation for nerve damage caused by a diagnostic procedure following a work injury.

Case Number VakO 15.2.2000/10042:98
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Finland (FI)
Decision Date
Outcome Allowed / Granted
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The Insurance Court overturned the Accident Board's decision to deny compensation for nerve damage sustained after a diagnostic scan. The insured suffered a work-related injury in late 1996, underwent a diagnostic scan in July 1997, and subsequently developed paralysis of the peroneal nerve. The court determined that the paralysis was a complication of the diagnostic procedure rather than the original injury, thereby ordering compensation under the relevant insurance regulations.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

TVL 14 § 4 momentti; TVL 15 §: If a medical examination or treatment performed in connection with a work injury causes new damage, such damage is compensable as a complication of the injury.

Keywords

AI generated
work injury compensation diagnostic procedure complication peroneal nerve paralysis insurance liability medical examination damage

Cited Legislation

AI generated
TVL 14 § 4 momentti
TVL 15 §
AI generated
kko-other_2012_2102
Supreme Court dismisses claim that CRPS syndrome is causally linked to a 2003 accident and subsequent surgeries.
kko-other_1998_570
Workplace injury claim dismissed as employee failed to prove causal link between lifting and injury.
insurance_1990_1630-1988
Insurance court dismissed claim for compensation from peacekeeping personnel regarding accident fund decision.
kko-other_1995_4910
Supreme Court dismisses claim for Sudeck atrophy compensation as it is not a recognized medical condition for disability benefits.
insurance_1979_1652-1979
Insurance court dismissed claim for aggravated degenerative disease damages where pre-existing condition was not caused by 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

X:n 21.11.1996 saamasta vasemman polven venähdyksestä johtuva työkyvyn alentuma oli katsottu alle 10 %:ksi 15.12.1996 jälkeen. X:lle oli 8.7.1997 tehty vasemman polven diagnostinen tähystys ja Maatalousyrittäjien eläkelaitos oli korvannut tästä toimenpiteestä aiheutuneet kustannukset TVL:n 14 §:n 4 momentissa tarkoitettuna tutkimuskuluna. Tähystyksen jälkeen X:n vasemman jalkaterän toiminnallinen tila on ollut huono ja hänellä on todettu pohjehermon halvaus. Esitetyn lääketieteellisen selvityksen perusteella vakuutusoikeus on pitänyt todennäköisenä, että X:llä todettu pohjehermon halvaus on seurausta 8.7.1997 tehdyn leikkauksen puudutustoimenpiteestä ja näin ollen vaurio on korvattava TVL:n nojalla X:lle 21.11.1996 sattuneen tapaturman seurauksena. Tapaturmalautakunnan päätös on kumottu ja X:lle on määrätty suoritettavaksi lainmukainen korvaus hänelle 8.7.1997 tehdystä vasemman polven tähystyksestä komplikaationa aiheutuneesta pohjehermon halvauksesta.

Jaosto:IV Äänestys: 4 1