Facts
On June 2, 1988, S. as a passenger in a passenger car suffered an accident when the driver C. disregarded a red light and collided with a correctly approaching motorcycle from the right. S. claimed to have suffered a whiplash injury to the cervical spine in the collision, which subsequently led to 100% incapacity to work. With a claim dated May 19, 1992, he demanded payment of CHF 231,353.-- plus interest from the X. Insurance Company as the insurer of the at-fault driver.
The District Court of Lucerne-Land dismissed the claim, as it denied the adequate causal link between the plaintiff's complaints and the accident of June 2, 1988. On the plaintiff's appeal, the High Court of the Canton of Lucerne overturned this judgment and remanded the case for re-assessment to the lower court. The Federal Supreme Court dismissed the appeal against this decision by the defendant.
Considerations
The Federal Supreme Court states that the Federal Supreme Court and the Federal Insurance Court apply the same definition of adequacy: An event is to be considered an adequate cause of a consequence if, according to the ordinary course of events and general life experience, it is in itself suitable to bring about a consequence of the type that has occurred. The legal policy purpose of adequacy is a limitation of liability in both social insurance and tort law.
The assessment of adequacy is based on a value judgment of the court according to Art. 4 of the Swiss Civil Code, based on law and equity. In this, the totality of the…