NEWS FLASH NEWS FLASHLANDMARK RULING IN GERMANY'S SUPREME COURT GOES AGAINST OZONE WARBLERS HUNDREDS OF GERMAN PARAGLIDER PILOTS ARE ABOUT TO RECEIVE RETROACTIVE BILLING FOR RESCUE EXPENSES, INSURANCE PAYOUT CANCELLATIONS AND DEMANDS FOR RETURN OF INSURANCE PAYOUTS Kein Versicherungsschutz für Notlandung auf BaumwipfelRicardo Peyerl Ricardo Peyerl 10.04.2017, 06:00
https://kurier.at/chronik/oesterreich/kein-versicherungsschutz-fuer-notlandung-auf-baumwipfel/257.312.781-------------------------
"This legal ruling threatens the future of Ozone Warblers in Germany," says a professor from the university.
"It could spell the end of socialized paragliding in Europe," said a taxidermist.
"I give you fifty dollar!" said a cook in black pajamas, suspiciously.
-------------------------
No accident insurance for emergency landing on treetops A paraglider pilot landed in a fir tree. But according to the Supreme Court of Germany, the flight was not yet over.
Among lawyers it is a good idea to argue what the typical dangers of aviation are and when they end. With a landing on solid ground? And how is [one to regard] an emergency landing on a treetop? The question is relevant to the extent that it is a matter of whether or not there is accident insurance.
There is now a fundamental ruling of the Supreme Court.A man from Vorarlberg started a paragliding flight, which caused him to lose altitude due to turbulence, so he decided to make an emergency landing. In the absence of other alternatives such as a free field, he made a controlled impact on a fir about 40 m high. He did not miss the top and landed on it. Still, the hobby sportsman did well in the circumstances. He called his wife by cell phone and also informed the rescue service and told them that he was uninjured and would shortly would climb down the tree.
Because the man was afraid that the rescue service would arrive by helicopter and disturb the canopy, he packed the paraglider in its backpack, then began the descent.
He lost his grip and fell the last five or six meters. On hitting the ground, the man was seriously injured. Since then, he has become a invalid with 24% of his body permanently disabled because of fractures of the right leg, heel bone and two lumbar vertebrae. But fortunately the sportsman had accident insurance with coverage for 25,000 euros.
However, the insurance company did not feel responsible: By the terms of the policy, the liability for accidents of the insured when flying for sport is excluded.
The soaring parachutist replied that he was no longer a "pilot" at the time of the accident. His flying, he claimed, had ended with the non-injury landing on the tree top. After that, he had been a tree climber and was therefore insured.
The Supreme Court (OGH) first held that the hobbyist would not have reached the top of the tree without the flight-induced emergency landing, nor would he have experienced the five-meter-long fall when he slipped. The flight can only be regarded as terminated when the aircraft has been abandoned in such a way that the associated risks are banished, ruled the court, by "attaining firm ground" under the feet.
Thomas Aigner of the Institute for Multimedial Legal Studies at the University of Linz considers the judgment correct: in principle, the insurance provider should not bear more risk than would exist if the act of flying had not been attempted at all.
Unfortunately, no egg was found.