Danish driver not entitled to compensation under Norwegian compensation rules
Supreme Court judgment 21 June 2024, HR-2024-1117-A, (case no. 23-149202SIV-HRET), civil case, appeal against Frostating Court of Appeal's judgment.
Codan Forsikring A/S (Counsel Joachim Mikkelborg Skjelsbæk), The Motor Insurers' Bureau (intervener), The Norwegian Occupational Injury Insurers' Bureau (intervener) (Counsel Terje Marthinsen) v. A (Counsel Trond Alan Walmsnæss Wehn)
The driver of a Danish crane truck was injured in an accident in Norway where no other vehicles were involved. Motor vehicle insurance had been taken out by the driver's Danish employer with a Danish insurance company. The driver had received compensation under Danish occupational injury rules, but also claimed compensation under the motor vehicle insurance.
Danish rules do not require motor vehicle insurance to cover injuries to the driver. However, this is a requirement under the Norwegian Automobile Liability Act. The question in this case was whether the Danish or Norwegian rules applied to the driver's claim against the insurance company.
The Supreme Court found that the case had to be decided under non-statutory conflict-of-law rules in non-contractual claims. In this case, these rules led to the application of Danish compensation rules. The driver was thus not entitled to compensation, and the insurance company was not liable.
The judgment clarifies the conflict-of-law rules applicable to motor vehicle insurance.
Key paragraphs: 37, 52, 58
Areas of law: choice of law, compensation
Justices: Matheson, Bergsjø, Bergh, Steinsvik, Hellerslia