[ad_1]
The Widerøe driver on sick leave won against Protector in district court, but the appeal court concluded that he should still not receive compensation as a result of his refusal to undergo the surgery. The case now goes to the Supreme Court.
A Widerøe pilot experienced severe pain in his abdomen in the fall of 2015 and a medical examination revealed gallstones.
After this, he was on sick leave and received medication. The pilot explained to the Borgarting Court of Appeal this fall that he has had 10-15 attacks of gallstones since the last flight in November 2015.
No one disagrees with the fact that this condition makes man unable to work as a pilot. However, you have not yet been able to fulfill your insurance claim.
This is because Protector, which is the company Widerøe has used to purchase loss of license insurance for its pilots, says the problem will be solved relatively easily by operating on the gallbladder.
Read on E24 +
Eight managers: these are our favorites among our own funds
He was awarded five million
However, the pilot did not want to have surgery. He has explained it with fear of anesthesia and complications during the operation.
Therefore, the case has passed to the judiciary.
In district court, the pilot was confirmed that the insurance company cannot impose surgery on him. He received NOK 5 million in license insurance for loss of income.
But Protector strongly disagreed and appealed the verdict. The insurance company noted that it is a simple surgical procedure with a low risk of serious complications.
– We have never required serious operations, but this is a very simple procedure that can cause a bit of discomfort for a few days afterwards. When it is the only alternative to being completely healthy, we believe this is something the injured party needs to do so that we can risk providing insurance, says claims director Fredrik Messel at Protector Forsikring.
The Borgarting Court of Appeal confirmed Protector. This fall came the verdict that the insurance company had the right to order the pilot to perform gallbladder surgery and that the pilot, by not undergoing surgery, is not entitled to license insurance.
The conclusion was based, among other things, on the court-appointed physician’s explanation that the probability of a successful surgery is high, combined with the fact that the pilot’s fear of surgery should not be more serious than the fact that you have said that you will consider surgery if the condition worsens.
Read on E24 +
How to decide if a stock is expensive or cheap
Unreasonable intervention
The pilot’s lawyer, Espen Rekkedal, explains to E24 that they are appealing the case because they believe that the question of surgery is within the client’s right to decide on his own body.
It considers that the legal right of insurance companies to order the insured to take measures that will obviously limit the scope of the company’s liability does not apply here because they are too intrusive measures.
– This is an unreasonable invasion of my client’s freedom to control his own person, he says.
If Protector wins in the Supreme Court, of course it is not the case that the pilot is forced to operate, Rekkedal adds. But the client must then weigh the fear of surgery against the loss of income.
Espen Rekkedal says he hopes the case will be heard in the Supreme Court closer to summer.
Like a lottery
Claims director Fredrik Messel at Protector says he understands the case has a principled side and thinks it is a good one with a clarification in the Supreme Court.
If the pilot is successful, he is concerned about what kind of signal he is sending to others in the same situation.
– Then you will almost encourage people not to have surgery, to cancel insurance, have the operation after, and then show up ready to work, with a lottery. It’s getting too easy.
Read on E24 +
Norwegian banks block clients’ accounts as players
Follow E24 on social media:
[ad_2]