Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
KKO 12/2012 AI generated

Supreme Court dismisses claim that occupational solvent exposure caused brain disease as compensable work-related illness.

Case Number KKO 12/2012
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Finland (FI)
Decision Date
Outcome Dismissed
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The Supreme Court dismissed the claim that a worker's brain disease was a compensable occupational illness caused by solvent exposure. The court found that the plaintiff failed to prove the disease was the primary result of occupational exposure rather than other factors. Consequently, the claim for work-related compensation was rejected due to insufficient causal evidence.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Work Injury Act 1983; Occupational Disease Act 1983: A disease is compensable as an occupational illness only if the occupational exposure is the primary cause, and the burden of proof regarding causation lies with the claimant.

Keywords

AI generated
occupational disease compensation causation burden of proof solvent exposure brain disease work injury liability primary cause requirement

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Work Injury Act 1983
Occupational Disease Act 1983
AI generated
kko-other_2002_793
Supreme Court dismisses claim for occupational solvent poisoning compensation due to lack of causal link between work and illness.
kko-other_2002_3575
Supreme Court dismisses claim for Parkinson's disease compensation due to lack of causal link between solvent exposure and symptoms.
insurance_1981_5531-1980
Insurance court allows disability compensation for a painter's chemical-induced polyneuropathy under Finnish Act on Occupational Diseases.
kko-precedent_2010_90
Supreme Court allows lung cancer compensation as occupational disease due to probable primary asbestos exposure at work.
kko-precedent_1992_80
Supreme Court rules rare nasopharyngeal cancer is a compensable occupational disease caused by workplace chemical exposure.

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

Kysymys siitä, oliko automaalarina työskennelleellä henkilöllä todennäköisesti pääasiallisesti työperäisen liuotinainealtistuksen aiheuttama aivosairaus ja oliko mainittu sairaus korvattava ammattitautina.