Background

A claimant filed a case against two defendants and requested the court to order the second defendant to pay the value of loan they owed to the first defendant (which was a bank).

The court rejected the case.

The claimant appealed the ruling before the court of appeal. The court upheld the appealed ruling.

Decision

The claimant appealed the ruling before the court of cassation and stated in his grounds of appeal that the ruling had erred in the application of law and that the court had established its ruling based on the argument that he had been injured before he benefitted from a collective insurance contract although the disability had resulted from an injury which had not existed until he benefitted from the contract.

The court stated this argument was invalid because the case documents revealed that the claimant's case was not considered to involve full disabilities which prevented him from working.