A story is spreading that in France a man died from the consequences of vaccination, having previously insured his life. At the same time, the court sided with the insurance company, which refused to pay compensation to the relatives and justified its position by the fact that the use of an experimental vaccine is, in fact, equivalent to suicide. We decided to find out what really happened.

This story spreads throughout many Russian-speaking Media, about her also they tell users social networks. She appeared even on some specialized resources dedicated to the insurance business. Lead also a quote from the court decision: “The side effects of the experimental vaccine are made public, and the deceased could not have been unaware of the risks when he voluntarily agreed to the vaccine.” Many resources indicate source of information material German-language publication Unser Mitteleuropa, and also refer to words family lawyer. However, there is no information in the text about the name of the deceased or the name of the judge who made this decision.

The official website of the administration of the French Republic gives clarifications, under what circumstances the death of the insured does not become an insured event and does not entail the payment of compensation to the beneficiary. There are only two such conditions: if the insured commits suicide during the first year of insurance or if the beneficiary is found guilty of murdering the insured person. The explanation also given reference to the legal framework, in particular articles L132-7 and L132-24 of section I of the French Insurance Code. There is no information on the official website of the republic that vaccination or the use of experimental therapy will also invalidate the insurance policy. That is, the story being replicated by the media is already contrary to the laws of the country. However, French fact checkers from “20 Minutes” additionally contacted to the French Federation of Insurers (FFA). They also denied the information: “Such a point does not exist. "The Trust regrets this attempt to misinform citizens regarding such an important public health topic as vaccination, and reminds that insurance contracts do not provide for exclusions related to the consequences of vaccination."

It is interesting that the media circulating this, as we have already found out, untrue story, refer to the family lawyer Carlo Alberto Brusa. Separately approved, that he “published the case materials on social networks and expressed his indignation at such a decision.” A lawyer with that name really exists and holds the position president law firm CAB Associs. At the same time, according to information on the official website, the company does not deal with matters in the field of insurance law. Also on the site indicated link to the company's Facebook page, and in first same post page marked and the personal page of Carlo Alberto Brusa. No comments regarding the story described on the page could be found. However, judging by the materials on Brusa’s Facebook page, he could well be a character in this story: he supports anti-vaccine rhetoric, in particular, he reposts famous conspiracy theorist Luc Montagnierwhose statements more than once figured it out us and our fellow fact checkers.

More interesting is the story with the site - the primary source of information about the trial. The Unser Mitteleuropa portal actively distributes other fakes, for example, which we discussed earlier myth that the vaccine can cause prion diseases. Also on his Facebook page blocked the ability to place advertisements due to violation of community rules. At the same time, the site mimics a fact-checking resource, since it states that it adheres to the principles of fact-checking and openness of sources.

Interestingly, the Unser Mitteleuropa resource, judging by WhoIs data, registered in Russia in March 2016 through the Reg.ru service, and is located in Poland.

Thus, the story about the death of a man from a vaccine, which was recognized by the court as suicide, is a fake, spread by an unauthoritative conspiracy resource. There are no supporting details in other open sources, the name of the deceased is unknown, there is no mention of which court the hearing took place, when and who the judge was. Moreover, French authorities completely deny the incident itself.