Retspraksis

  • Sagsoplysninger
    • Nationalt ID-nr.: 249/1999
    • Medlemsstat: Danmark
    • Almindeligt anvendt navn:Susanne Petersen versus Skandia Forsikring
    • Afgørelsestype: Andet
    • Afgørelsesdato: 15/02/2000
    • Retsinstans: Højesteret
    • Emne:
    • Sagsøger:
    • Sagsøgt:
    • Nøgleord:
  • Direktivets artikler
    Unfair Contract Terms Directive, Article 6, 1. Unfair Contract Terms Directive, Article 6, 2.
  • Indledende note
    1. The case concerned the fairness under the Formation of Contract Act § 38 c, cf. § 36 (implementing art. 6 of the Unfair Contract Terms Directive 93/13/EEC ) of an arbitration clause in an accident insurance contract.
  • Fakta
    According to one of the terms of an accident insurance contract it was a condition for damages for permanent injury that the degree of permanent injury was not less than 5 %. The contract also had an arbitration clause. According to the clause each party of the contract could demand that the degree of permanent injury and the temporary loss of earning capacity be fixed finally (i.e. without recourse to the courts) by the National Board of Industrial Injuries.

    The insured party injured her knee. The National Board of Industrial Injuries found that the degree of permanent injury was less than 5 %.

    The insured party brought the case before the courts claiming i.a. that she was not bound by arbitration clause and, therefore, that the lawsuit was not barred by the decision made by the National Board of Industrial Injuries.

    The city court as well as the Eastern High Court decided the case in favour of the insurance company and dismissed the case with reference to the arbitration clause.

    The Supreme Court found that the insured party was bound by the arbitration clause (however, the decision of the National Board of Industrial Injuries was annulled according to the Arbitration Act because of procedural errors).
  • Juridisk spørgsmål
  • Afgørelse

    the insurance contract presented the arbitration clause in a clear way and with special emphasis and the clause was therefore part of the contract between the parties;
    the arbitration clause dealt only with decisions concerning the degree of permanent injury and temporary loss of earning capacity;
    the National Board of Industrial Injuries is an independent public agency authorized by legislation to make decisions on inter alia the said questions to be used in court cases concerning damages;
    the clause did not exclude per se the insured party from demanding a new decision on the degree of permanent injury etc. with reference to new information;
    neither did the clause exclude the insured party from bringing the case before the courts claiming that the decision made by the National Board of Industrial Injuries be declared void according to the Arbitration Act because of procedural error etc.
    therefore, the arbitration clause was binding for the insured party and it could not be set aside according to art. 38 c, cf. § 36 of the Formation of Contract Act.

    Hele teksten: Hele teksten

  • Relaterede sager

    Ingen resultater

  • Retslitteratur

    Ingen resultater

  • Resultat