Facts

Parties:

  • Appellant: [A.] , represented by attorney Thomas Wehrlin
  • Respondent: Suva, Military Insurance Department

Facts:

  • [A.] was injured in 1993 during recruit training and received an integrity damage pension as well as a monthly car allowance (car allowance).
  • The Suva-MV reduced the car allowance to CHF 115.20 per month as of November 2017, previously it was CHF 472.90.
  • The Lucerne Cantonal Court dismissed [A.] 's appeal against this reduction.
  • [A.] filed an appeal in public law matters with the Federal Supreme Court to restore the higher car allowance.

Considerations

Legal basis and interpretation:

The Federal Supreme Court examines the appeal for violations of the law pursuant to Art. 95 et seq. FSCA. It is bound by the factual findings of the lower court unless they are obviously incorrect or based on a violation of the law (Art. 97 para. 1 and Art. 105 para. 2 FSCA).

Claim for aids:

The lower court correctly presented the legal basis for the claim for aids (Art. 21 MilIA) and further cost reimbursement (Art. 39 para. 3 MilIA). The Suva-MV's change in practice to base the car allowance on a kilometer allowance of CHF 0.60 was considered substantively and seriously justified. The lower court saw no violation of good faith or the claim to be treated without arbitrariness.

Cost coverage under Art. 21 para. 6 MilIA:

The Federal Supreme Court found that Art. 21 para. 6 MilIA does not provide for any restriction on cost coverage as long as it concerns significant costs. However, the costs must be considered within the framework of the 'simple' and 'appropriate' (Art. 21 para. 2 sentence 1 MilIA). Since [A.] would have…