Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
KKO 1797/1999 AI generated

Supreme Court allows reduction of insurance compensation when calculating damages for permanent disability in personal injury cases.

Case Number KKO 1797/1999
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Finland (FI)
Decision Date
Outcome Allowed / Granted
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The Supreme Court of Finland allowed the reduction of insurance compensation when calculating damages for permanent disability. The lower court ordered B to pay A for permanent disability and injury, deducting the amount already received from private leisure time insurance. The court held that the insurance payment must be deducted because it represents a benefit received for the same loss.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Käräjäoikeus 1999/1797: When calculating damages for permanent disability, any compensation received from private insurance for the same loss must be deducted from the total award.

Keywords

AI generated
permanent disability damages insurance compensation deduction subrogation principle personal injury law double recovery prevention

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Käräjäoikeus 1999/1797
AI generated
ECLI:FI:KKO:2024:43
Supreme Court allows appeal on criminal charge but remands civil compensation claim due to procedural error.
ECLI:FI:KKO:2020:19
Supreme Court orders defendant to pay plaintiff's appeal costs exceeding insurance self-contribution limit.
kko-precedent_1998_29
Supreme Court allows appeal against arbitration award costs when opposing party was not a true adversary in lower court.
kko-precedent_2000_41
Supreme Court dismisses new compensation claims for post-judgment illness as inadmissible in higher courts.
ECLI:FI:KKO:2023:2
Supreme Court allows appeal against dismissal of traffic damage claim due to insurer's vague refusal.

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

A oli käräjäoikeudessa vaatiessaan B:ltä korvausta pysyvästä viasta ja haitasta vähentänyt vaatimuksesta yksityisestä vapaa-ajan tapaturmavakuutuksesta saamansa korvauksen. Käräjäoikeus tuomitsi B:n suorittamaan A:lle korvausta pysyvästä viasta ja haitasta sekä määräsi siitä vähennettäväksi maksetun vakuutuskorvauksen. Kysymys siitä, voiko hovioikeus katsoessaan B:n muutoksenhakemuksesta pysyvästä viasta ja haitasta koituneen vahingon määrän pienemmäksi kuin käräjäoikeus pysyttää käräjäoikeuden lopputuloksen sillä A:n hovioikeudessa esittämällä perusteella, ettei vakuutuskorvausta tulisi vähentää tuomittavasta korvauksesta.