# I 2023 91 — Industrial Accident Suit Dismissed Due to Appellant's Improper Action

**Geschäftsnummer:** I 2023 91
**Citation:** VG SZ I 2023 91
**Gericht / Behörde:** Verwaltungsgericht (1. Kammer)
**Entscheiddatum:** 2024-08-22
**Canonical Legislator URL:** https://docs.legislator.ch/de/sources/court-decision/ch-sz/SZ_VG_003_I-2023-91_2024-08-22/industrial-accident-suit-dismissed-due-to-appellant-s-improper-action
**Official Source URL:** https://gerichte.sz.ch/vg/tribunavtplus/loadTable
**Entscheidsuche Mirror:** https://entscheidsuche.ch/docs/SZ_Verwaltungsgericht/SZ_VG_003_I-2023-91_2024-08-22.pdf

## Zusammenfassung (Sachverhalt & Erwägungen)

An appellant, who was injured in an industrial accident involving a machine used in their work, appealed a decision that dismissed their claim for damages and pain and suffering against the machine's owner/operator, arguing that the owner failed to ensure the machine was safe. The court upheld the prior decision, reasoning that the evidence did not establish that the machine was defective or that the owner had breached any duty of care regarding maintenance or operation, as the accident's cause was determined to be the appellant's own improper actions while using the equipment.

## Leitsatz / Regeste

An appellant, who was injured in an industrial accident involving a machine used in their work, appealed a decision that dismissed their claim for damages and pain and suffering against the machine's owner/operator, arguing that the owner failed to ensure the machine was safe. The court upheld the prior decision, reasoning that the evidence did not establish that the machine was defective or that the owner had breached any duty of care regarding maintenance or operation, as the accident's cause was determined to be the appellant's own improper actions while using the equipment.

## Volltext des Entscheids

\n    
\n    
\n    
\n    
\n

\n\n|  |  |
| --- | --- |
|\n I 2023 91 |\n  |\n
\n\n

\n    
\n    
\n    
\n    
\n

\n\n|  |  |
| --- | --- |
|\n  |\n Urteil vom 22. August 2024 |\n
\n\n

\n    
\n    
\n    
\n

\n\n|  |  |
| --- | --- |
|\n Besetzung |\n Dr.iur. Vital Zehnder, Vizepräsident |\n
\n|\n  |\n Dr.med. Bernhard Zumsteg, Richter Dr.med. Pierre Lichtenhahn, Richter |\n
\n|\n  |\n lic.iur. Anna Maria Rüesch, Gerichtsschreiberin |\n
\n\n

\n    
\n    
\n    
\n    
\n    
\n

\n\n|  |  |
| --- | --- |
|\n Parteien |\n A.\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_, \n Kläger, \n vertreten durch Rechtsanwalt B.\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_, |\n
\n|\n  |\n gegen |\n
\n|\n  |\n C.\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ AG \n Beklagte, \n vertreten durch Rechtsanwältin D.\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ |\n
\n\n

\n