Insurers will not be responsible for covering incidents stemming from low blood sugar during daily travel.

Insurers will not be responsible for covering incidents stemming from low blood sugar during daily travel.

A man with diabetes was driving home from work when he unintentionally crashed into an oncoming truck, causing severe injuries. Emergency responders discovered that he was suffering from low blood sugar. The employer's health insurance company refused to acknowledge this incident as a work-related accident because it occurred four kilometers away from his residence.

According to the insurer, the man had already changed direction and was no longer on the direct route home. However, the plaintiff asserted in his lawsuit that this was a consequence of his illness. He had lost his sense of direction due to hypoglycemia and continued driving.

In the verdict, the judges at the Labor Court ruled that this was an "internal cause" in the form of unconsciousness caused by diabetes-related hypoglycemia. Expanding coverage to these types of cases would increase the scope of insurance protection during work commutes, which would largely contradict the purpose of workplace accident insurance.

The regulatory work accident insurance only covers "unusual" deviations from the direct route resulting from "outside factors of the traffic environment." This encompasses instances such as darkness, fog, and inadequate signage.

In its decision in April, the court reversed a previous ruling by the Social Court in Oldenburg, which had supported the plaintiff's dispute with the insurer. The Higher Labor Court in Celle agreed to review the case on its own accord due to its "foundational importance."

Read also:

1. The employer's liability insurance association argued that the accident was not covered by work-related insurance, pointing out that the commute involved a detour due to hypoglycemia.
2. The emergency doctor suggested filing a claim with the man's accident insurance to cover medical expenses stemming from the commuting accident.
3. In Bremen, a hearing was scheduled at the Labor Court to discuss the case of the man with diabetes who suffered an accident during commuting due to hypoglycemia.
4. The man's accident insurance company initially rejected the claim, citing the distance from his workplace as evidence that the accident was not work-related.
5. The employer's liability insurance association in Lower Saxony was under pressure to clarify the boundaries of work-related accident coverage in light of the commuting accident case.
6. The plaintiff's attorney argued that the "deviation from the direct route" was an unavoidable consequence of the man's hypoglycemia, qualifying the accident as work-related, despite the detour.

• Shift in appetite for dairy: From cultural norms to moral conversations
• This will change in December
• Dikes withstand water masses so far - Scholz holds out the prospect of help
• Fireworks and parties ring in 2024 - turn of the year overshadowed by conflicts