Facts
Ramo B., born in 1944, was employed as a laborer at company R. and was thus compulsorily insured against the consequences of occupational and non-occupational accidents with the Swiss Accident Insurance Fund (SUVA). On August 4, 1990, he was a passenger in the front seat of a passenger car driven by Alic M., without wearing a seatbelt. This resulted in a head-on collision, in which Ramo B. suffered fatal injuries.
The SUVA awarded a widow's pension to Mina B., the widow of the deceased, but reduced it by 10% due to Ramo B.'s failure to wear a seatbelt. Mina B. filed a complaint against this reduction, which was dismissed by the Administrative Court of the Canton of Schwyz.
Considerations
The Federal Insurance Court confirmed that the failure to wear a seatbelt constitutes gross negligence, which justifies a reduction in insurance benefits, provided there is an adequate causal link between the fault and the accident event or its consequences.
The appellant argued that wearing seatbelts is not considered an elementary precautionary measure by the population. However, the court rejected this, as it is based on the objective justification of the traffic regulations and not on their acceptance.
The reference to the different legal practice in criminal and liability law was also considered unfounded, as the objectives of Art. 90 No. 2 RTC and Art. 37 para. 2 AICA are…