Facts
The judgment concerns the refusal by the Swiss National Accident Insurance Fund to provide a finger prosthesis to an insured person, considering that such prostheses had only an aesthetic and not a functional purpose. The case was brought before the Cantonal Insurance Court of Ticino and subsequently before the Federal Insurance Court.
Considerations
The Federal Insurance Court ruled that hand and arm prostheses, including finger prostheses, can be considered assistive devices to compensate for physical or functional impairment within the meaning of Art. 11 LAINF, regardless of whether they also have an aesthetic purpose. Indeed, disability insurance also provides for the supply of aesthetic prostheses, such as ocular prostheses.
Furthermore, the Court stated that the list of assistive devices provided in the OMAINF is exhaustive with regard to the categories of assistive devices, while for each category it is necessary to verify whether the list within it is exhaustive…