Kernrechtsfrage
Whether the cantonal court arbitrarily found that the insured had not practiced diving professionally, so that no intentional misrepresentation or reticence was proven.
Extrahierter Entscheid
No. The challenged appreciation of evidence was not manifestly untenable, and the insurer's objections were largely appellatory.
Extrahierte Begründung
The cantonal court could rely on one witness; the documents did not conclusively prove professional diving by the insured, and even the Genoa decision did not compel the opposite factual finding.