Constitutional Court strikes one-year insurance deadline

Anyone claiming an insurance benefit who received a qualified refusal previously had to sue within one year – otherwise the claim was gone, however justified. The Constitutional Court struck down this special rule of § 12 Abs 3 VersVG as unconstitutional by ruling of 28 April 2026, G 176/2025.

The reasoning

The court found a violation of the principle of equality: the provision effectively gave the insurer the choice of whether the general three-year limitation period applied to the claim or – triggered by its own letter of refusal – a drastically shortened one. Such unilateral power over the limitation period of the other contracting party could not be objectively justified.

What applies now

The court set a remedial period for the repeal; for practice, however, the direction is clear: claims under insurance contracts are subject to the general three-year limitation period. Anyone who received a refusal in the past and let the one-year deadline lapse should have the case reassessed – depending on the constellation, the claim may still be enforceable.

Practical consequences

• Policyholders gain time and negotiating room: the pressure to sue "into the blue" within a year disappears.
• Refused legacy cases from the last three years deserve a second look.
• Businesses should review their claims files: particularly with business interruption, legal expenses and building insurance, claims frequently failed on the short deadline alone.