Facts
N., born in 1968, was insured against the consequences of accidents with the Swiss Mobiliar Insurance Company (Mobiliar) as the managing director of company X. On December 18, 2003, he suffered an accident in which he fell 5.6 meters from a lift. Mobiliar acknowledged its obligation to provide benefits but discontinued the daily allowance payments as of September 18, 2004. N. subsequently filed a complaint against this decision.
Mobiliar had N. under surveillance by private detectives from July 7, 2004 to August 12, 2004 and from January 27, 2006 to February 26, 2007. The Federal Supreme Court now had to examine whether this surveillance was lawful and whether the results of the surveillance could be used as evidence.
Considerations
The Federal Supreme Court concluded that the ordering of surveillance of insured persons by the accident insurance is permissible within a certain framework. The surveillance results can therefore generally be used to assess the disputed issues.
While both the ordering and the use of the results encroach on the scope of protection of the fundamental right to privacy, this protection is not absolute and can be restricted in accordance with Art. 36 of the Federal Constitution if the legal requirements are met.
The Federal Supreme Court considers these requirements to be fulfilled. The legal bases in…