No exception for disabled person who received low standard compensation for loss of future income due to occupational injury
Supreme Court judgment 23 May 2025, HR-2025-978-A, (case no. 24-198393SIV-HRET), appeal against Agder Court of Appeal's judgment.
Storebrand Livsforsikring AS (Counsel Jarl Rune Henstein), YFF (intervener) (Counsel Kaare Andreas Shetelig) v. A (Counsel Magne Olsen), LTN (intervener) (Counsel Tom Sørum)
A service engineer became permanently disabled due to tinnitus sustained while working aboard a ship.
His employer had occupational injury insurance with Storebrand. A dispute arose between the injured party and Storebrand regarding the calculation of compensation for future loss of income. Storebrand maintained that the compensation should be determined according to Regulations on standardised compensation under the Occupational Injury Insurance Act. The injured party argued that applying the Regulations would result in unreasonably low compensation compared to an individual assessment under the Damage Compensation Act, and therefore should not apply in his case.
The difference was mainly due to the fact that the standardised compensation under the Regulations has an income cap of 10 times the National Insurance basic amount (G), while the injured party had a higher income. In addition, the capitalisation rate used in personal injury compensation under the Damage Compensation Act has gradually been reduced—from 6 percent to 2.5 percent—since the Regulations were issued. A lower interest rate results in a higher total compensation amount. The injured party referred to the legislature’s intention of full compensation in cases of occupational injury.
The Supreme Court found no grounds to depart from the Regulations in this case and agreed with the parties that the income cap aligned with the assumptions underlying the Regulations at the time of their issuance. No subsequent developments justified a different conclusion. Although the reduction in the capitalisation rate is not reflected in the Regulations, this affects all individuals covered by them. The Court also noted that work is underway to revise the compensation rates to reflect the updated capitalisation rate.
The judgment has significance for the possibility of exceptions to the standardised compensation scheme under the Occupational Injury Insurance Act.
Read the judgment from the Supreme Court (Norwegian only) (PDF)
Areas of law: Insurance and compensation law, sections 3 and 13 of the Occupational Injury Insurance Act.
Key paragraphs: 32, 49–50, 59–62, 70
Justices: Webster, Bull, Thyness, Hellerslia og Poulsen