1. Decisions of the state social courts on basic income support for job seekers (SGB II)
1.1 – Bavarian State Social Court, decision of 12 January 2017 – L 7 AS 913/16 B ER
Preliminary legal protection against the integration administrative act
Principle (Juris):
In expedited proceedings, administrative acts relating to integration are to be reviewed only summarily. Legal protection is to be granted only if the summary review reveals not merely doubts, but substantial doubts as to the legality of the act. (Official principle)
Source: socialcourtsability.de
1.2 – Lower Saxony-Bremen State Social Court, decision of 05.12.2016 – L 15 AS 257/16 B ER
Matters under the German Social Code, Book II (SGB II)
For the enforcement of reasonable accommodation costs pursuant to Section 22 of the German Social Code, Book II (SGB II) and related issues concerning a rent ceiling determined by administrative instruction in preliminary legal protection proceedings.
Note to the court:
In substantive terms, the application for the granting of maintenance-securing benefits pursuant to Section 16 Paragraph 1 of the German Social Code, Book I (SGB I) has already acted as an application triggering entitlement to similar benefits under the German Social Code, Book XII (SGB XII) (Federal Social Court, judgment of August 26, 2008 – B 8/9b SO 18/07 R –, para. 22, decision of February 13, 2014 – B 8 SO 58/13 B).
Source: www.rechtsprachung.niedersachsen.de
1.3 – Hamburg State Social Court, Judgment of 09.12.2016 – L 4 AS 437/15
No protection of legitimate expectations in the case of preliminary decisions (Lower Saxony-Bremen State Social Court, judgment of 27 September 2016 – L 11 AS 1004/14; Saxony-Anhalt State Social Court, judgment of 26 August 2015 – L 4 AS 81/14) – no need for assistance exists as a self-employed person
Principle (Editor)
1. The “sale” of the software developed by the plaintiff is not a mere reallocation of assets, so the proceeds are to be considered income.
2. The plaintiff did not sell the software he developed in the sense that he transferred all usage rights and privileges to a single customer, thereby relinquishing all future access to the software himself. Rather, he made it available to several customers for their use and received payment for this. Therefore, the use of the term "sold" in this context is to be understood in a non-technical sense. The payment he received constitutes income within the meaning of the German Social Code, Book II (SGB II).
3. If the software were to be regarded as an asset of the plaintiff, the income he receives as consideration for the transfer of the software for use would be fruits of this asset within the meaning of Section 99 of the German Civil Code and as such income within the meaning of the German Social Code, Book II.
Source: socialcourtsability.de
1.4 – Hamburg State Social Court, Judgment of 08.09.2016 – L 4 AS 564/15
Regarding the crediting of care allowance as income – care allowance income is only privileged when caring for relatives
Guiding principle (Editor)
1. On the crediting of forwarded care allowance against the ongoing basic income support benefits for job seekers to which the caregiver is entitled.
2. Crediting of care allowance when caring for non-family members (§§ 3 No. 36 in conjunction with 33 para. 2 sentence 1 EStG).
Source: socialcourtsability.de
Legal tip:
See also LSG Hamburg, judgment of 08.09.2016 – L 4 AS 567/15 and – L 4 AS 569/15
1.5 – Saxony State Social Court, Decision of 19 December 2016 – L 7 AS 1001/16 B ER – legally
binding. Principle (Editor):
In the context of preliminary legal protection proceedings, it must be assumed that the concept underlying the City of Leipzig's directive of 18 December 2014 meets the requirements established by the Federal Social Court (BSG) for a conclusive concept regarding the appropriateness of expenses for accommodation and heating costs (following the Chemnitz State Social Court, Decision of 29 August 2016 – L 8 AS 675/16 B ER).
Source: socialcourtsability.de
1.6 – LSG Schleswig-Holstein, Judgment of 30 May 2016 (Case No.: L 11 AS 39/14 NK):
Guiding principle Dr. Manfred Hammel
1. Bylaws issued by a provider of basic income support for job seekers pursuant to Section 22a of the German Social Code, Book II (SGB II) for the determination of the appropriateness of the costs of accommodation (Section 22 Paragraph 1 Sentence 1 SGB II) are materially unlawful insofar as the SGB II provider set the accommodation costs classified therein as appropriate in each case in deviation from the state law provisions for the promotion of social housing.
2. If these lower values have been incorporated into the product formation for determining the price reasonableness limit, the determination of the reasonable gross rent must be considered as entirely ineffective.
3. This also applies if the determination of the appropriate price per square meter, considered in isolation, meets the requirements of a coherent concept within the meaning of Section 22c of the German Social Code, Book II (SGB II) and cannot be materially objected to.
4. A determination of the abstractly appropriate living space for households receiving benefits of 45 sqm for one person, 55 sqm for two persons, 70 sqm for three persons, 80 sqm for four persons, 90 sqm for five persons and 100 sqm for six persons is not covered by Section 22b Paragraph 1 Sentence 1 No. 1 SGB II.
5. These determinations do not meet the material requirements that can be imposed on the appropriateness of the living space pursuant to Section 22 Paragraph 1 Sentence 1 of the German Social Code, Book II (SGB II).
6. Even when enacting bylaws pursuant to Section 22a of the German Social Code, Book II (SGB II), a social welfare agency may not determine the appropriateness of living space through arbitrary, politically motivated by local politics. Reliable data on the local housing market must be available to deviate from the space limits in social housing construction, and the determination of the deemed appropriate price per square meter must be based on a coherent concept as defined in Section 22c of the SGB II.
7. However, it is insufficient to meet the requirements of a coherent concept to merely set appropriate living spaces as deviating relatively from the space limits in social housing – without empirical data on the actual living conditions of lower-income groups in the area – if empirical data only justify the assumption that larger or smaller apartments are generally available in the area of the respective municipal authority than the state average. The reasons for apartment size in a particular region are manifold and are related, in particular, to household size and population structures.
8. If a downward deviation of five square meters has been made from the values stipulated in the state's implementing regulations for the promotion of social housing, then it is methodologically inadmissible and therefore conceptually flawed to use this value as the baseline and to determine the appropriate living space in a manner that deviates significantly from the value established statewide. Such a procedure is not based on an empirically sound and valid data foundation and does not allow for any conclusions to be drawn about the size of apartments in which lower-income earners live in this federal state.
9. Such bylaws must be based on sufficiently realistic and verifiable surveys of the typical housing needs of the respective groups of people affected, which provide valid information about the average apartment size of certain household types, e.g., that the average living space in the location in question is generally substantially smaller than the state average. At this point, the average apartment size must be considered in relation to the average number of residents per apartment.
10. A blanket reduction of the living space deemed appropriate is not based on a viable, coherent concept within the meaning of Section 22c of the German Social Code, Book II (SGB II).
11. A statutory provision stipulating that for childless, employable benefit recipients under the age of 25 who are permitted to live in their own apartment, only a living space of 35 square meters and consequently a gross rent of EUR 233 is considered appropriate, is incompatible with Section 22b Paragraph 3 Sentence 1 of the German Social Code, Book II (SGB II) in conjunction with Section 22 Paragraph 1 Sentence 1 of the SGB II and is therefore invalid. The needs of each individual case can vary considerably and largely defy abstract, general regulation by statute.
12. Abstract reductions in needs that are not based on the housing market and reality, but solely on social policy assessments, are to be considered inadmissible for constitutional reasons.
2. Decisions of the social courts on basic income support for job seekers (SGB II)
2.1 – Social Court Cottbus, decision of 12.08.2016 – S 40 AS 1768/16 ER – obtained by attorney Dr. Jens-Torsten Lehmann, Cottbus
A late application or losing sight of the job placement offer does not always justify a reduction in standard benefits.
A confusing explanation of the legal consequences renders a sanction notice unlawful, because the warning function of the explanation of the legal consequences is only guaranteed if it is presented clearly and visually.
A notice of legal consequences does not fulfill its warning function if it is formally written in a font size that is significantly smaller than the font size of the rest of the document.
Principle (Editor)
1. The applicant has not refused to take up the work or prevented the initiation of the work.
2. The fact that an application might be forgotten during an application phase, even if the application activities are within a manageable scope, is not so unlikely that one could assume, without further evidence, that this statement is a pretext
3. The fact that the application was promptly submitted in such an appealing form that the employer was willing to offer the applicant a secondary job also suggests that the initial conduct was merely negligent.
4. There are doubts as to whether the instruction on legal consequences is designed in such a way as to satisfy its warning function.
5. The legal consequences notice is printed in a significantly smaller font than the rest of the text. The words "legal consequences notice" are not highlighted, and the text, with its lack of paragraphs and large font size, is designed in such a way that it is difficult to read smoothly.
6. In order to fulfill its warning function, a notice of legal consequences must, in addition to being factually correct and understandable, be printed in such a clear manner that it immediately catches the eye of the person concerned and that he or she is able to read and understand the notice without any problems.
7. The text accompanying the mediation proposal is insufficient for this purpose.
Legal tip:
SG Munich v. 10.08.2016 – S 13 AS 2433/14 – A notice of legal consequences does not fulfill its warning function if it is formally written in a font size that is significantly smaller than the font size of the rest of the document.
2.2 – Social Court Cottbus, judgment of October 13, 2016 (Case No.: S 42 AS 1914/13):
Guiding principle by Dr. Manfred Hammel
1. The legal basis for granting a subsidy for the purpose of purchasing an internet-enabled computer by a needy student attending upper secondary school is derived from Section 21 Paragraph 6 of the German Social Code, Book II (SGB II).
2. This need in the amount of EUR 350 is unavoidable within the meaning of Section 21 Paragraph 6 of the German Social Code, Book II (SGB II), because it cannot be covered by contributions from third parties or by savings from the standard allowance and also deviates considerably in amount from an average need.
3. A PC that incurs acquisition costs of EUR 350 does not fall under the average personal school supplies, which, according to § 28 para. 3 SGB II, are set at a total of EUR 100 per school year for needy pupils, primarily intended for the supplementary and replacement of necessary school supplies.
4. The need for a computer is also unavoidable if students can only meet the constant demands of their lessons with this means, i.e., if they can only perform the necessary preparation and follow-up work for the lessons, because otherwise these trainees face a significant restriction in their educational opportunities.
5. The claim under Section 21 Paragraph 6 of the German Social Code, Book II (SGB II) for the requested subsidy is not precluded by the fact that this provision, according to its wording, refers to an ongoing – and not a one-off – need.
6. The need for a computer required for school education over an extended period constitutes a need that incurs ongoing costs, even if the long-term need is met with a one-time payment. If a computer were rented, the monthly rental fee for such a device would undoubtedly represent an ongoing additional need that is eligible for recognition under Section 21 Paragraph 6 of the German Social Code, Book II (SGB II).
2.3 – Social Court Reutlingen, Judgment of 14 November 2016 – S 7 AS 449/16 – legally binding
Benefits for initial furnishing of an apartment – not every single missing item needs to be specifically identified by the person in need – Section 24 Paragraph 3 Sentence 1 No. 1 SGB II
Initial furnishing of an apartment must also be granted if the plaintiff previously had access to furnishings (after moving out of the former family apartment, the plaintiff lived for a total of 9 years in small one-room apartments, some of which were already furnished, and he was unable to keep his furniture).
Negligent conduct in connection with the loss of the apartment furnishings does not preclude the claim; the JC has options for action available according to § 34 para. 1 sentence 1 SGB II.
Principle (Editor)
1. In the present case, the replacement of furniture from the plaintiff's previous family life after its loss triggers a need within the meaning of Section 24 Paragraph 3 Sentence 1 No. 1 of the German Social Code, Book II (SGB II). According to the legislative concept, not only initial purchases are covered, but replacement purchases can also establish an entitlement under Section 24 Paragraph 3 Sentence 1 No. 1 of the German Social Code, Book III (SGB III). The fundamental question is whether the need arising from the loss of previously existing household furnishings is to be interpreted as equivalent to, or even considered to be equivalent to, initial furnishings. Reprehensible conduct in connection with the loss of the household furnishings does not preclude the entitlement, because the need to be covered under the SGB II must, in principle, exist currently and must also be currently covered by the basic income support provider (principle of needs coverage).
2. According to the principle of meeting needs, it is generally irrelevant that the plaintiff was allowed to simply abandon, sell or throw away his furniture nine years before the current need arose and thus negligently created a need.
3. For a family, four chairs are appropriate for basic equipment, so that guests (and not just a single person) can be received from time to time.
See also the guiding principle (Juris):
Initial furnishing of an apartment – renewed need after an interim move to a one-room apartment – principle of covering needs – reprehensible conduct – representation of the household – individual claims of the members – social court proceedings
Guiding Principles
1. Declarations of appeal must not be interpreted in such a way as to unreasonably impede the appellant's access to the courts in a manner that is no longer justifiable on objective grounds. If it is clear from the submissions of an appellant that they are pursuing joint claims with the knowledge and consent of the other members of the household receiving benefits, the request must be interpreted as a lawsuit on behalf of all members of the household receiving benefits. This also applies after the expiry of the transitional period set by the Federal Social Court (judgment of November 7, 2006 – B 7b AS 8/06 R –) for the period up to June 30, 2007.
2. The principle of meeting needs requires a needs-based consideration of the entitlement to housing furnishings.
3. The destruction or loss of items used for furnishing a home and household can, in principle, trigger a renewed claim for furnishings, because those in need of assistance must be enabled to live in a dignified manner. The reason for the loss of the items, in particular any culpable conduct on the part of the person in need of assistance, is irrelevant. This aspect only becomes relevant in the context of a potential claim for compensation under Section 34 of the German Social Code, Book II (SGB II).
2.4 – Social Court Munich, decision of 05.01.2017 – S 46 AS 3026/16 ER
Continued right of residence for self-employed EU citizens
Principle (Juris):
If a Union citizen ceases self-employment, which she has pursued for more than one year, pursuant to Section 2 Paragraph 2 Number 2 or 3 of the Freedom of Movement Act/EU, due to pregnancy and childbirth, a continuing right of residence may exist pursuant to Section 2 Paragraph 3 Sentence 1 Number 2 of the Freedom of Movement Act/EU. In this case, the exclusion from benefits pursuant to Section 7 Paragraph 1 Sentence 2 Number 2 of the German Social Code, Book II (SGB II) does not apply for a limited period. (Official principle)
Source: www.gesetze-bayern.de
2.5 – Social Court for Saarland, judgment of 11 January 2017 (Case No.: S 12 AS 421/14):
Guiding principle Dr. Manfred Hammel
1. The job center must enable a needy adult student to participate in the official graduation ceremony of his high school with the presentation of the graduation certificate by the school administration by covering the costs incurred for attending this event in the amount of EUR 100,- in an extensive interpretation of § 28 para. 1 sentence 1 and para. 2 sentence 1 SGB II.
2. The central underlying motive of Section 28 Paragraph 2 Sentence 1 of the German Social Code, Book II (SGB II), namely that the exclusion of young people from school community events can have a particularly lasting and negative impact on their development, can also be applied here.
2.6 – Social Court Berlin, decision of 16 January 2017 (file no.: S 53 AS 17169/16 ER):
Guiding principle Dr. Manfred Hammel
1. A measure for integration into employment pursuant to Section 31 Paragraph 1 Sentence 1 No. 3 SGB II must be reasonable and suitable, in accordance with the general principles enshrined in Section 10 Paragraphs 1 and 3 SGB II, to promote the integration of employable benefit recipients into the labor market (Section 3 Paragraph 1 SGB II).
2. If an applicant who is both self-employed and marginally employed, and who has adapted well to this situation, already lacks the motivation to participate in a measure for "activation and placement with intensive support and mandatory attendance", which is also known to the responsible employment advisor, and this measure is not designed to reduce such motivational deficits, then this measure is unsuitable for bringing this applicant into employment.
3. Decisions of the State Social Courts on Employment Promotion (SGB III)
3.1 – Hessian State Social Court, Judgment of 16 December 2016 – L 7 AL 35/15 – The appeal is granted
The plaintiff is challenging the imposition of a one-week suspension period due to late registration as a jobseeker – Section 38 SGB III n. F.
Trainees in inter-company training should also be treated equally to those in company-based training.
Guiding principle (Editor):
1. No waiting period for social workers in their recognition year due to insufficiently early registration as job seekers.
2. The plaintiff did not contact the defendant within the time limit stipulated in Section 37b Sentence 1 or Section 37b Sentence 2 of the German Social Code, Book III (SGB III aF).
3. However, the plaintiff cannot infer from this any conduct contrary to the insurance policy and consequently justifying a waiting period within the meaning of Section 144 Paragraph 1 Sentence 1 in conjunction with Sentence 2 No. 7 of the German Social Code, Book III (SGB III aF), since, in application of the provision of Section 37b Sentence 5 of the German Social Code, Book III (SGB III aF), the obligation to report did not apply to her.
4. In this respect, the recognition year completed by the plaintiff within the framework of an internship was equivalent to a "company-based training relationship" within the meaning of Section 37b Sentence 5 of the German Social Code, Book III (SGB III aF). While this is not immediately apparent from the wording of the provision – the term "company-based training relationship" is not expressly defined – it is nevertheless evident from the purpose and intent of the regulation.
Source: socialcourtsability.de
Legal tip:
Unemployment benefits without a waiting period during the recognition year
The LSG Darmstadt has ruled that people completing a recognition year as part of an internship do not have to register as job seekers prematurely.
Source: Press release from the Darmstadt Higher Social Court dated January 24, 2017: www.juris.de
3.2 – LSG Rhineland-Palatinate, Judgment of 26 January 2017 – L 1 AL 67/15 – Appeal allowed
LSG Mainz: No red light at the employment agency
Press release 1/2017 State Social Court of Rhineland-Palatinate
No job placement in "red-light bar"
The Federal Employment Agency is not obligated to post job offers for barmaids in a bar attached to an erotic establishment, or for receptionists in the establishment itself, on its online job portal "JOBBÖRSE." This was decided yesterday by the First Senate of the State Social Court in a ruling.
Source: lsgrp.justiz.rlp.de
4. Decisions of the State Social Courts on Social Assistance (SGB XII)
4.1 – Baden-Württemberg State Social Court, Judgment of 19 October 2016 – L 2 SO 4204/15
The plaintiff is seeking assistance with motor vehicle costs as part of integration assistance for the replacement of a motor vehicle adapted for people with disabilities.
Principle (Juris):
If other options besides the use of the vehicle requested within the framework of vehicle assistance are available for achieving the integration goals specified by the person concerned, the acquisition of a vehicle is not indispensable.
Source: socialcourtsability.de
Legal tip:
See also: Baden-Württemberg State Social Court, judgment of 19 October 2016 – L 2 SO 3968/15
5. Decisions of the State and Social Courts and Administrative Courts on Asylum Law
5.1 – LSG Bavaria, Decision of November 11, 2016 (Case No.: L 8 AY 28/16 B ER):
Guiding principle Dr. Manfred Hammel
1. In the case of a family originating from Kosovo who is subject to an enforceable deportation order (§ 1 para. 1 no. 5 AsylbLG) and who has been granted church asylum, the authority responsible for the implementation of the AsylbLG cannot take the position that the granting of benefits for nutrition and personal and health care is precluded by an exclusion of benefits pursuant to § 8 para. 1 sentence 1 AsylbLG.
2. While the church congregation bears the costs for accommodation and heating, there is no legal obligation for the congregation to cover the necessary living expenses of the person granted church asylum. If the church does not assume full responsibility for providing assistance, then there is no alternative coverage of needs within the meaning of Section 8 Paragraph 1 Sentence 1 of the Asylum Seekers' Benefits Act (AsylbLG).
3. The provision of assistance by third parties or institutions in anticipation of an expected benefit from the public authority does not eliminate the need for assistance.
4. By seeking church asylum, applicants effectively evade the reach of state enforcement agencies, meaning that deportation measures cannot be carried out for reasons attributable to these individuals. In this situation, applicants can therefore only claim entitlement to benefits pursuant to Section 1a Paragraph 2 Sentence 2 of the Asylum Seekers' Benefits Act (AsylbLG) (to cover their needs for food, personal hygiene, and healthcare).
5. Further restrictions than those provided for in § 1a AsylbLG are not permitted solely on the grounds of seeking church asylum.
5.2 – VG Cologne from January 26th, 2017 – 4 K 8794/16.A, 4 K 8824/16.A, 4 K 8935/16.A
Not every asylum seeker faces persecution upon return to Syria.
The Cologne Administrative Court has rejected the lawsuits of Syrian nationals seeking the granting of comprehensive refugee protection status under the Geneva Refugee Convention.
The Federal Office for Migration and Refugees (BAMF) had granted the plaintiffs, two single young men, subsidiary protection from the dangers of the civil war in Syria. The plaintiffs believe they are entitled to refugee status. Refugee status differs from subsidiary protection primarily in that it grants them easier conditions for indefinite residence in Germany and the right to bring family members to Germany. According to the plaintiffs, they are entitled to an upgrade of their protection status because the Syrian state, based on their departure from Syria, their asylum application, and their extended stay abroad, presumes they hold politically critical views of the regime.
Source: Press release from the Cologne Administrative Court dated January 26, 2017: www.juris.de
6. Miscellaneous information on Hartz IV and other legal codes
Berlin Social Court: Pension entitlements due to work performed in ghettos (“ghetto pensions”)
The Berlin Social Court has ruled in three cases on the conditions under which work performed in ghettos gives rise to pension entitlements against the German Pension Insurance.
Victims of Nazi persecution sue before the Social Court – Even 71 years after the end of the Nazi dictatorship, disputes over ghetto pensions persist.
Press release from January 26, 2017: www.berlin.de
ECJ to clarify the conformity of the visa requirement for spousal reunification with Turkish nationals under EU law.
Press release no. 1/2017 BVerwG 1 C 1.16 26.01.2017.
The Federal Administrative Court in Leipzig today referred a case concerning the granting of a residence permit for the purpose of spousal reunification with a Turkish worker living in Germany to the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) in Luxembourg for clarification of questions regarding the scope of the "non-deterioration clause" (standstill clause) in the EU/Turkey Association Agreement.
Further information: www.bverwg.de
New brochure: Social rights for refugees (Migration in the Paritätische: Publications)
Social rights for refugees
Publisher: The Paritätische Gesamtverband (Parity Association)
Author: Claudius Voigt, GGUA Münster
Editor: Kerstin Becker, The Paritätische Gesamtverband (Parity Association)
The brochure can be downloaded free of charge as a PDF file: www.migration.paritaet.org
Overviews of the Amounts of Social Security Benefits (SGB II, SGB XII, AsylbLG) - Claudius Voigt, GGUA
An overview of the standard benefit rates and additional needs allowances under SGB II (the same rates apply to benefits under SGB XII and analogous benefits under Section 2 AsylbLG) for 2017: www.harald-thome.de
• A compilation showing how the standard benefit rates are structured according to individual categories for specific needs (important, for example, for reviewing the new, reduced "bridging benefits" for certain non-working EU citizens; a detailed guide will follow shortly): www.harald-thome.de
• An overview of the amount and breakdown of the standard benefit rates in the basic benefits under Section 3 AsylbLG. These regulations will remain in effect at the same levels as in 2016 until further notice, at which point a new regulation will come into force following an agreement in the mediation committee: www.fluechtlingsinfo-berlin.de
Here are three practical tips:
• Comprehensive information on the Asylum Seekers' Benefits Act (AsylbLG) and other areas of refugee/migration law can be found on the Berlin Refugee Council's website: www.fluechtlingsrat-berlin.de
• Comprehensive information, including on the German Social Code, Book II (SGB II) and Book XII (SGB XII), can be found on the website of the Wuppertal-based association tacheles eV: tacheles-sozialhilfe.de
• Harald Thomé publishes a regular newsletter with current information on the right to subsistence, new court rulings, options for enforcing one's rights, and more. You can and should subscribe to it free of charge here: tacheles-sozialhilfe.de
Legal Aid: "Exceptionally," a Single Telephone Call Sufficient – Attorney Helge Hildebrandt, Kiel.
In a decision dated January 23, 2017, under file number 7 UR II 23/16, the Kiel Local Court overturned a court order rejecting an application for legal aid. The court had argued that the applicant could have sought a solution to the matter independently without legal assistance and that the application for legal aid was therefore "frivolous" within the meaning of Section 1 Paragraph 1 No. 3 in conjunction with Paragraph 3 of the Legal Aid Act.
In the appeal proceedings, the court confirmed that the applicant had credibly demonstrated his "independent efforts" prior to consulting a lawyer. Due to the urgency and importance of the matter, as well as the credible response from the opposing party, "exceptionally, a single telephone call was sufficient."
Note: sozialberatung-kiel.de
Waiting times exceeding 15 minutes must be taken into account when determining the appearance fee.
Waiting times of a lawyer before an oral hearing that exceed the time stated in the summons by more than 15 minutes and are solely attributable to the court must be considered when determining the appearance fee. For a waiting time of 1.5 hours, the standard fee is to be increased by one-third (Decision of the Schleswig-Holstein Higher Social Court of November 22, 2016, L 5 SF 91/15 BE).
Attorney Helge Hildebrandt: sozialberatung-kiel.de
Fines for Hartz IV recipients: Can someone receiving unemployment benefit II (ALG II) also be sentenced to a fine?
Expert article by lawyer Robert Binder
www.refrago.de
Author of the legal news ticker: Detlef Brock, editor of Tacheles
Source: Tacheles legal case law ticker, www.tacheles-sozialhilfe.de
