Legislator Corpus juridique & Jurisprudence
DE FR IT EN
Analyser dans Legislator
I 2023 91 • VG SZ I 2023 91 Structuré par IA

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

Numéro de cause I 2023 91 (SZ_VG_003_I-2023-91_2024-08-22)
Autorité / Tribunal
Date de la décision
Juridiction Canton de Schwytz — Tribunaux cantonaux (CH-SZ)
Ouvrir la source officielle ↗ Miroir Entscheidsuche ↗ Version Markdown lisible par machine (.md)

Synthèse de l'arrêt (Faits & Considérants)

Structuré par IA

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.

Regeste / Sommaire juridique

Structuré par IA
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.

Vous souhaitez savoir comment cet arrêt s'applique à votre dossier ?

Analysez cette décision avec la législation fédérale, le droit cantonal, la doctrine et la jurisprudence subséquente dans Legislator AI.

Ouvrir dans Legislator →

Texte intégral de la décision — I 2023 91

\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