Facts
Parties: A. (appellant), ÖKK Health and Accident Insurance AG, AIA substitute fund, Association X., Y. GmbH.
Court: I. social law division of the Federal Supreme Court.
Date: April 30, 2021.
Main question: Whether [A.] is to be considered an employee of [Y. GmbH] and who is responsible for accident insurance benefits.
Facts:
- [A.] worked as an insurance advisor and part-time ice hockey coach and player.
- Contractual agreements between [A.], Z. AG, Association X. and [Y. GmbH] led to a transfer of the employer role.
- [A.] suffered an accident during an ice hockey game and applied for benefits from the accident insurance.
- The ÖKK and the AIA substitute fund refused liability, leading to appeals.
Considerations
The lower court correctly established that [A.] is to be qualified as an employee within the meaning of the AIA. This follows from the contractual obligations and compensation claims, which represent dependent gainful activity within the meaning of the OASIA legislation. The activity as an ice hockey player and coach forms a coherent employment relationship, with the player activity not being unpaid.
The employer status lies with [Y. GmbH], as it issued OASIA-obligatory salaries from May 1, 2017, and accounted for social security contributions. [Y. GmbH] acted as the sole employer obligated to account…