Facts
G. requested affiliation with the mandatory health insurance with the Sumiswalder Kranken- und Unfallkasse (hereinafter: Sumiswalder) as of January 1, 2000. Sumiswalder refused to affiliate him without the documents from his former insurer (Visana). G. insisted on being affiliated without these documents. In November 2001, Sumiswalder learned that G. was insured with Visana. It then agreed to affiliate him retroactively as of January 1, 2003, provided that Visana released him from his contract on that date. Sumiswalder refused to compensate G. for the difference in premiums. The Administrative Court of the Canton of Bern partially upheld G.'s appeal and ordered Sumiswalder to compensate him for the difference in premiums from December 1, 2001 to June 30, 2003. G. appealed against this decision.Considerations
The Federal Insurance Court considers that a change of insurer cannot result in double insurance. The new insurance contract can only begin once the previous one has ended. According to Art. 7(5) 1st sentence HIA, the insurance relationship with the former insurer only ends when the new insurer has notified the former insurer that the insured person has been affiliated with it without interruption of insurance coverage. Since this notification was not made, the insurance relationship with Visana did not end, and the affiliation with Sumiswalder could not take place.
However, the Federal Insurance Court considers that the new insurer has the obligation to make this notification directly to the former insurer. If it does not know the identity of the former insurer, the omission of this notification is not unlawful, and there is no obligation to compensate the damage…