Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
KKO 2583/2000 AI generated

Supreme Court allows compensation for work-related muscle strain treated as occupational disease under Finnish Act on Work-Related Diseases.

Case Number KKO 2583/2000
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 compensation for a worker who suffered a muscle strain while lifting a heavy cart. The court determined that although the injury was not a formal accident, it equated to a work-related disease under the Act on Work-Related Diseases. Consequently, the claimant was entitled to benefits under the Accident Insurance Act.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Act on Work-Related Diseases 1993, Section 1, Paragraph 6; Act on Accident Insurance 1983: Muscle strain caused by work tasks is deemed a work-related disease and qualifies for accident insurance compensation.

Keywords

AI generated
work-related disease muscle strain occupational injury compensation entitlement lifting tasks

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Act on Work-Related Diseases 1993, Section 1, Paragraph 6
Act on Accident Insurance 1983
AI generated
kko-other_2001_439
Work injury claim dismissed because pre-existing pain was not a direct cause of the new muscle tear.
kko-other_1997_4250
Supreme Court held that a gap between the third and fourth lumbar vertebrae is not a compensable accident consequence under private accident insurance.
insurance_1979_2790-1978
Insurance court dismissed work injury claim for shoulder tear caused by lifting heavy package.
kko-other_1996_674
Workplace injury claim dismissed because employee's fall was caused by his own negligence, not employer fault.
kko-other_1996_320
Workplace injury claim dismissed as employee's own negligence caused 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

A oli työssään nostanut oikealla kädellä painavaa maitokärryä ja saanut oikean hauislihaksen etäisemmän pään jänteen repeämän. Vamma oli aiheutunut todennäköisesti nostoliikkeen seurauksena. A:lla ei todettu muuta vikaa, vammaa tai sairautta, mistä repeämä olisi voinut mahdollisesti aiheutua. Kysymyksessä ei ollut tapaturma mutta vamman katsottiin rinnastuvan eräistä työtapaturmina korvattavista vammoista annetun asetuksen 1 §:n 6 kohdassa tarkoitettuun kipeytymiseen ja oikeuttavan tapaturmavakuutuslain mukaiseen korvaukseen.