Facts
This decision concerns an appeal by the Swiss National Accident Insurance Fund (SUVA) against a judgment of the Administrative Court of the Canton of Lucerne. The central issue is whether the adequate causal link is established between the accident that occurred on 19 April 1991 and the subsequent psychological development of the insured, with regard to the entitlement to accident insurance benefits.
SUVA considers that the criteria of adequacy must be the same for the examination of the entitlement to a disability pension and for the examination of the entitlement to treatment costs. The cantonal court, on the other hand, believes that it is justified to apply a more flexible criterion for the examination of the adequate causal link with regard to temporary and time-limited benefits, compared to permanent benefits such as the disability pension.
Considerations
The Federal Tribunal considers that the concept of adequate causality is identical in all legal fields, but that the legal conditions of liability differ. This necessarily implies that the principle of adequate causality must be applied differently, particularly in the field of social accident insurance, where adequacy plays a role in limiting the insurer's liability for accidents that generate or do not generate benefits.
Thus, the possibility of differentiating the examination of adequacy according to the type of benefit at stake is not justified. Whether the question concerns the entitlement to temporary or permanent benefits, the same criteria of…