Background

A claimant filed a case against a bank and his wife requesting that the court appoint an expert to calculate the value of his share in a remaining loan amount he and his wife had received.

The back filed a case against an insurance company requesting that the court order it to pay the mentioned amount.

The court fulfilled the bank and claimant's requests.

The insurance company appealed and the appeal court abandoned the ruling.

The bank appealed by cassation.

Decision

Before the cassation court the bank argued that the ruling had insufficient evidence of causation as it had requested that the court refer the claimant to a medical committee to determine the reasons for his resignation.

The court held that this argument was valid as the court had ignored this request despite it being a substantial one which may have altered the ruling outcome.

The court therefore repealed the ruling.