Legislator Giurisprudenza & Legislazione
DE FR IT EN
Analizza in Legislator
KKO 2011/2019 Generato dall'IA

Voluntary accident insurance for business owners does not cover injuries caused by intentional acts of another person.

Numero d'incarto KKO 2011/2019
Autorità giudiziaria
Giurisdizione Finlandia (FI)
Data della decisione
Esito del giudizio Respinto (Dismissed)
Apri la fonte ufficiale Versione Markdown leggibile dalle macchine (.md)

Sintesi Legislator

Generato dall'IA

The Supreme Court dismissed the claim for voluntary accident insurance benefits under the Accident Insurance Act. The insured suffered injuries when pushed by another person, an act the lower court deemed intentional. The Court ruled that such intentional harm falls outside the scope of coverage for voluntary business owner accident insurance.

Regesto Legislator

Generato dall'IA

Accident Insurance Act 57 §; voluntary accident insurance for business owners does not cover injuries resulting from the intentional act of another person.

Parole chiave

Generato dall'IA
voluntary accident insurance business owners intentional act exclusion of coverage Supreme Court ruling diritto a una copertura assicurativa più estesa frode nelle giustificazioni del contratto di assicurazione lacuna giurisdizionale

Disposizioni normative citate

Generato dall'IA
Accident Insurance Act 57 § (1314/2002)
Generato dall'IA
kko-precedent_2001_135
Supreme Court allows insurance claim adjustment for assault victim's severe injury despite exclusion clause.
kko-precedent_1990_26
Supreme Court allows claim against insurer and agent for misrepresentation inducing policy without specific exclusion clause.
insurance_1975_9480-1974
Insurance court dismissed claim for work injury compensation when back pain occurred during leisure time laundry transport.
insurance_1976_9265-1975
Insurance court dismissed claim when injury resulted from intentional criminal act rather than accidental workplace accident.
kko-other_1999_1797
Supreme Court allows reduction of insurance compensation when calculating damages for permanent disability in personal injury cases.

Ti chiedi come si applica questa sentenza alla tua fattispecie?

Analizza questa decisione insieme alla legislazione federale e cantonale, ai commentari e alla giurisprudenza successiva in Legislator AI.

Apri in Legislator →

Testo completo

A, jolla on ollut tapaturmavakuutuslain 57 §:n 2 momentin (1314/2002) mukainen yrittäjien vapaaehtoinen vapaa-ajan tapaturmavakuutus, oli vammautunut vapaa-ajallaan, kun B oli tönäissyt A:ta sillä seurauksella, että A oli horjahtanut ja kaatunut rantakivikkoon. Käräjäoikeus oli lainvoimaisella tuomiollaan lukenut B:n syyksi vammantuottamuksen. Korkein oikeus katsoi ratkaisusta ilmenevillä perusteilla, että vammat olivat aiheutuneet sellaisesta toisen henkilön tahallisesta teosta, jonka varalta tapaturmavakuutuslain 57 §:n 2 momentin mukaan ei voinut saada vapaaehtoista vakuutusta.

TapaturmavakuutusL 57 § (1314/2002)