Art. 64 Bundesgesetz vom 20. März 1981 über die Unfallversicherung (UVG) - Geschäftsleitung

UV.2022.00145 · zh (Art. 64 Abs. 2 UVG)

Health Insurer v. Workers' Compensation Insurer (Coordination of Benefits)

Defines the order of priority for coverage of treatment costs among different social insurance providers.

A/4192/2019 · ge (art. 64 LAA)

Insured Appeal of Benefit Termination Following TBI and Auditory Injury

This provision dictates that the procedure is free of charge (costs are not incurred by the parties).

UV.2014.00229 · zh (Art. 64 al. 1 UVG)

Disability Insurance Benefits Reinstated Due to Improper Termination

This provision is cited implicitly by the court's decision to award costs to the successful plaintiff.

35.2005.1 · ti (art. 64 LAINF)

Appeal Dismissal for Untimeliness in Accident Insurance Dispute

This provision (implicitly referenced by the statement that no fees are charged) covers the waiver of court fees when striking the case from the record due to the appeal becoming moot.

35.2000.85 · ti (art. 64 LAINF)

Insured v. Insurance Company Regarding Continued Orthopedic Disability Benefits Following Accident

The court addressed the appellant's request for legal aid (gratuitous patronage), which was deemed moot because the appeal succeeded and costs were awarded against the state.

35.2001.5 · ti (Art. 64 LAINF)

Insured Bricklayer v. Insurer: Disability Rating for Shoulder Injury

Implied basis for cost allocation, as a decision on appeal costs is present in the dispositive (though the specific article is not explicitly cited in the dispositive, the general principle of costs follows the outcome, and given the lack of explicit LTF cost/aid articles in the ruling itself, procedural context is prioritized if present).

35.2002.26 · ti (Art. 64 LAINF)

Insured Benefits Termination Upheld Due to Lack of Causal Link Between 1996 Accident and 2000 Disability

This article concerns the assessment of the level of disability (IMI), which was the subject of one of the initial decisions that was partially accepted by the appellant regarding the 15% IMI.

35.2005.27 · ti (Art. 64 LAINF)

Insured's Rotator Cuff Injury Disability Pension and Impairment Indemnity Appeal

The text is in Italian, but based on the structure and context of Swiss social security law, Art. 64 LTF (Federal Supreme Court Act) would typically govern legal aid if applicable, however, since the decision is from the Cantonal Court (TCA), the mentioned third point refers to appeal to the Federal Tribunal (Tribunale federale delle assicurazioni) and likely cites the relevant procedural provision for costs or legal aid if applicable, but the dispositive only mentions costs and awarding costs (Art. 66 LTF equivalent in cantonal procedure, or potentially Art. 64 LTF if referring to Federal Court procedure, although the court making the ruling is Cantonal). Since point 2 cites costs provisions which are usually Art. 66 LTF or similar cantonal provisions, and point 3 cites the appeal possibility, I will focus on the explicit ruling in 1 and 2.

35.2016.75 · ti (Art. 64 LAINF)

Insured Person v. Insurer (Knee Injury/Work Incapacity Evaluation)

Imposed no costs and implies the court waived the collection of court fees, although this specific article is not explicitly mentioned in the dispositive structure, the waiver of fees is covered here or in Art. 66 LTF regarding costs. Since the specific cost provision is Art. 66 LTF regarding costs and fees, and no provision for legal aid (Art. 64 LTF) was explicitly cited in the final orders concerning legal aid, only the cost provision will be listed if present.

35.2016.87 · ti (art. 64 LAINF)

Nurse v. Accident Insurer: Brachial Plexopathy as Surgical Risk vs. Accident

This provision is cited in the reasoning (although the actual dispositive only lists cost rules, and not legal aid rules like Art. 64 LTF), but since the dispositive is silent on legal aid, no provision from Art. 64/66 is extracted unless explicitly named in the dispositive.

35.2022.45 · ti (Art. 64 LAINF)

Chef v. Accident Insurer (Vertebral Fracture and Neurological Impairment Dispute)

This article is implicitly relevant as the decision deals with an accident insurance case, but no explicit reference is found in the dispositive ordering.