Facts
[Y.], born in 1964, was employed as a ramp worker and later as an assistant baker in the bakery department of the consumer cooperative X since March 1990 and was insured against occupational and non-occupational accidents with the Swiss Accident Insurance Fund (SUVA). In July 1992 and November 1993, he suffered anaphylactic reactions after consuming certain foods, which led to allergy tests revealing a polyvalent sensitization. SUVA placed [Y.] under occupational medical supervision and declared him unfit for work involving exposure to certain flours and nuts. As a resumption of his previous activities was no longer possible, the employer terminated his position at the end of November 1994.
Subsequently, [Y.] claimed that he suffered from a mental disorder in the form of a specific phobia or a comprehensive anxiety disorder, which was causally related to the occupational disease. However, SUVA denied the natural and adequate causal link between the occupational disease and the alleged mental disorder.
Considerations
The Federal Court states that the case law on the adequacy of mental disorders following accidents is not analogously applicable to occupational diseases. Rather, the adequacy must be assessed based on whether the occupational disease or events in connection with it are suitable, according to the ordinary course of…