Facts
On 28 February 2011, a prosthesis was implanted in the left hip of A., an independent geologist. On 7 March 2012, following complications from the previous surgery, what was supposed to be the definitive prosthesis was inserted. Subsequently, A. suffered a breakage of the prosthesis while exiting his vehicle. On 12 September 2013, he had to undergo a new surgery. The accident insurer, Helsana Insurances Ltd, denied its obligation to provide benefits, considering that the breakage of the prosthesis was due to illness or a degenerative phenomenon, without the presence of an extraordinary external event. Similarly, the possibility of classifying the disorder as an injury assimilated to an accident was excluded.Considerations
The Federal Tribunal dismissed A.'s appeal against the insurer's decision. According to the Tribunal, the breakage of a prosthesis does not constitute an accident within the meaning of Art. 4 GSSLA, as it is a process that occurred within the human body and does not have an extraordinary character. Furthermore, the breakage of the prosthesis…