Background

A claimant filed a case against a ministry requesting that the court appoint an expert to determine the damage resulting from the ministry's decision to suspend work in his workshop.

The court rejected the case.

The claimant appealed and the appeal court upheld the ruling.

The claimant appealed by cassation.

Decision

Before the cassation court the claimant argued that the ruling had erred in the application of law as the state is obliged to compensate citizens for the risks of war, and the national economy was established upon the concepts of social equity.

The court held that this argument was invalid as, if the decision of the ministry was compliant with the law, the ministry should not be asked about the damage resulting from such decision.

The court therefore dismissed the appeal.