Information Law Possum

This blog is officially still on hold (until I’m finished with my PhD thesis …), but this is worth posting immediately:

The Swiss Federal Supreme Court — at least its 2nd Social Security Law Division (II. Sozialversicherungsrechtliche Abteilung) — has started to quote Wikipedia in 2007:

• In a decision from May 3, 2007 (I 871/06) the Court relied on Wikipedia’s description of volleyball moves in order to assess whether the appellant who played volleyball was unable to work due to a disability in his arms.
• In a decision from January 18, 2008 (K 136/06, published as FCD 134 V 72, cons. 3.1) the Court took the German Wikipedia entry for “Autoscooter” (German-English pidgin for bumper car) as evidence that collisions in bumper cars are almost innocuous, which led it to the conclusion that losing a tooth in a bumper car is an accident under federal social security law.
• In a decision from January 7, 2008 (9C_286/2007) the Court referred to an expert opinion which stated that hyperthyreosis morbus Basedow causes depression, adding that a Wikipedia printout which had been submitted by the appellant stated the same.

These three judgments have been drafted by different clerks of the same department of the Federal Supreme Court that decides matters of social security. In this area of law, legal proceedings are not entirely driven by the parties, but the courts may to a certain extent collect evidence as well. Civil and criminal legal proceedings being totally different in this respect, the probative force of Wikipedia entries in these field still remains unclear.

This entry was posted on Tuesday, May 20th, 2008 at 3:32 am and is filed under litigation, peer production.