Jugement Kantonsgericht (VD - 2017/162)

Canton:	VD
Case number:	2017/162

Instance:	Kantonsgericht
Department:	Sozialversicherungsgericht

Kantonsgericht Entscheid 2017/162 vom 14.02.2019 (VD)

Date:	14.02.2019
Force of law:	-

Summary:	An insured person who worked as a Plâtrier-Peintre suffered an accident at work. The accident insurance company refused to recognise it as an occupational accident because the insured had been working as a concierge since 1992. The insured sued before the insurance court. The insurance court ruled in favor of the insured and recognized the accident at work as an occupational accident. The accident insurance must pay a pension to the insured person. More detailed summary: The insured, Mr L.________, suffered an accident at work on 22 February 2017. He was working as a concierge at the time, but had also previously worked as a plâtrier-peintre. The accident insurance company refused to recognise it as an occupational accident because the insured had been working as a concierge since 1992. The insured sued before the insurance court. He argued that the accident at work had arisen as a result of his work as a Plâtrier-Peintre. The insurance court ruled in favor of the insured and recognized the employmen
Rule of Law:	Art. 100 BGG;Art. 21 SchKG;Art. 44 SchKG;Art. 6 SchKG;Art. 60 SchKG;Art. 8 SchKG;Art. 94 SchKG;
BGE reference::	-
Comment:	-

Please note that there is no claim to topicality/accuracy/format and/or completeness and that therefore any guarantee is excluded. Original decisions may be ordered or made on the basis of the competent court.

Click here to return to the page search engine.