1. Decisions of the state social courts on basic security for job seekers (SGB II)
1.1 - Lower Saxony-Bremen State Social Court, judgment of November 22, 2018 - L 15 AS 55/1
Guiding principle (Juris)
1. An expense allowance paid for council members and members of the administrative committee, which serves both to reimburse expenses and to compensate for loss of earnings to be taken into account as income within the meaning of Section 11 Paragraph 1 Sentence 1 SGB II.
2. In any case, there is no earmarking within the meaning of Section 11a Paragraph 3 SGB II if the council member is neither actually nor legally prevented from using the expense allowance paid to cover needs in accordance with SGB II according to the compensation statutes.
Source: www.rechtsprachung.niedersachsen.de
1.2 - State Social Court of Lower Saxony-Bremen, judgment of September 26, 2018 - L 11 AS 1124/15
Guiding principle (Juris)
1. The municipal provider has the right to sue under Section 44a Paragraph 6 Sentence 4 SGB II. The correct type of action is the declaratory action in accordance with Section 55 Paragraph 1 No. 1 SGG aimed at the judicial determination of the extent of the need for assistance in specific individual cases of the granting of benefits.
2. The abstract review of the employment agency's technical information to the job center for SGB II case processing cannot be the permissible subject of a lawsuit in accordance with Section 44a Paragraph 6 Sentence 4 SGB II. The SGG does not have such a review of internal administrative regulations.
3. If the municipal authority's complaint arises solely from technical information that it considers to be incorrect, an interest in establishing a lawsuit in accordance with Section 44a Paragraph 6 Sentence 4 SGB II can be assumed from the point of view of actual precedent.
4. Insofar as Section 31a Paragraph 2 Sentence 1 SGB II - first stage of the sanction for persons under 25 years of age - can be interpreted both to the effect that income and assets are to be counted towards the KdUH requirements after the sanction event occurs, and to the effect that the KdUH are to be provided unchanged in the amount determined before the sanction event occurred, the interpretation option that is more favorable for the aid recipient must be chosen due to the exceptional nature of sanctions as an interference with the constitutionally protected minimum subsistence level.
Source: www.rechtsprachung.niedersachsen.de
1.3 – Bavarian State Social Court, decision v. 12/05/2018 – L 7 AS 977/18 B ER
Guidance sentence (editor)
1. Refusing to verify your identity does not automatically mean that it is an inadmissible application (but see BSG decision of February 6, 2018, B 5 1/17 BH Rz. 5 on the minimum requirement for an application in court Procedure). Rather, an authority may have to deny benefits if an effective application is submitted despite the refusal to establish identity (this is also the case in the decisions LSG Baden-Württemberg judgment of May 17, 2018, L 7 AS 4682/17 and LSG Berlin-Brandenburg decision of April 15, 2014, L 31 AS 762/14 B ER). For this purpose, the authority must carry out a proper procedure to issue a failure notice, during which the applicant has another opportunity to submit the requested documents.
2. The applicant will have to provide proof of identity so that the applicant can check the applicant's identity (on the importance of establishing identity for the provision of services, see BSG decision of February 6, 2018, B 5 12/17 BH on the one hand, on the necessity of services “in the amount of what is irrefutably required” in the absence of identification BSG judgment of May 12, 2017, B 7 AY 1/16 R on the other hand; see also LSG Baden-Württemberg judgment of May 17, 2018, L 7 AS 4682/17 Rz 37 on the refusal of Services in the context of the initial identification and paragraph 38 ff, if there are ultimately no doubts about the identity of an applicant).
Guiding principle (Juris)
1. Failure to provide proof of identity can result in the denial of benefits according to SGB II
2. The job center can request presentation of a registration certificate in order to be able to check its local jurisdiction.
Source: socialcourtsability.de
1.4 – State Social Court of Saxony-Anhalt, judgment of October 19, 2016 – L 4 AS 736/15 – legally binding
Basic security for job seekers - income consideration - additional payment of housing benefit for several months - no analogous application of Section 11a Paragraph 1 No. 1 SGB 2
Guidance sentence (editor)
1. Housing benefit is monetary income within the meaning of Section 11 Paragraph 1 Sentence 1 SGB II.
2. There is no special constellation within the meaning of Section 11a SGB II, in which actual income would not have to be taken into account.
Guiding principle (Juris)
The case law of the BSG (judgment of June 25, 2015, B 14 AS 17/14 R) on the analogous application of Section 11a Paragraph 1 No. 1 SGB II to benefits under the AsylbLG is on (back) payments of benefits not transferable according to the WoGG.
Source: socialcourtsability.de
1.5 – Saxon State Social Court, judgment of November 8, 2018 – L 7 AS 1086/14
Guidance sentence (editor)
On the legal question of whether proceeds from crimes can be counted as income or assets towards the needs of the SGB II benefit recipient, here in the affirmative.
Source: socialcourtsability.de
Note:
Also seen as income: LSG Berlin-Brandenburg, decision v. August 31, 2017 - L 31 AS 1462/17 B ER, see also Schmidt in: Schlegel/Voelzke, jurisPK-SGB XII, 2nd edition 2014, § 82 SGB XII Rn 25.2
The case law has not yet conclusively clarified whether income obtained in social assistance constitutes income unlawfully or even through criminal conduct.
1.6 – Berlin-Brandenburg State Social Court, judgment of 12/03/2018 – L 18 AS 1712/17
Guidance sentence (editor)
However, if the person in need of help has already purchased and paid for heating material before applying for SGB II benefits, they cannot have these costs reimbursed by the basic social security provider in accordance with Section 22 Paragraph 1 SGB II because these are not actual current expenses and there is no entitlement to reimbursement for expenses incurred before the application was submitted. According to Section 37 Paragraph 2 Sentence 1 SGB II in the version that has been in force since January 1, 2011 and is applicable here, SGB II benefits are not provided for periods before the application is submitted.
Source: socialcourtsability.de
1.7 – Berlin-Brandenburg State Social Court, judgment of November 29, 2018 – L 25 AS 3043/14
Orientation sentence (editor)
No additional need for nutrition here with lactose intolerance.
In individual cases, a whole food diet avoiding intolerable foods was sufficient.
Source: socialcourtsability.de
1.8 – State Social Court of North Rhine-Westphalia, judgment of October 11, 2018 – L 7 AS 1331/17
Basic security for job seekers - claim for compensation in the event of socially unfavorable behavior - gross negligence causing the need for help - burdensome effect of a basic notice
No reclaim of unemployment benefit II after termination of training
Guidance sentence (editor)
No obligation to pay compensation on the part of the person in need of help i. S.d. § 34 SGB II, because the regulatory concept of § 34 SGB II does not contain any authority to issue a basic decision (deviating from the supplementary LSG North Rhine-Westphalia judgment of April 22, 2013 - L 19 AS 1303/12).
Source: socialcourtsability.de
Sa:
No reclaim of unemployment benefit II after termination of training
The LSG Essen has decided that the loss of a training position due to extraordinary termination can justify a reduction in benefits, but not an obligation to replace SGB II benefits.
further: www.juris.de
2. Decisions of the social courts on basic security for job seekers (SGB II)
2.1 – Berlin Social Court, judgment of September 21, 2018 – S 64 AS 7585/16
Basic security for job seekers - Integration agreement - Termination of an agreed training measure - Legality of the basic security provider's claim for damages
Guiding Principle
Section 15 Paragraph 3 SGB 2 aF does not result in a claim for damages by the job center against the benefit recipient due to the cancellation of a measure from the integration agreement if the compensation provisions made therein are contradictory.
Source: socialcourtsability.de
2.2 – SG Cologne, judgment of December 3, 2018 – S 43 AS 874717
SG Cologne from December 3rd, 2018: The concept presented by Rödl & Partner regarding appropriate accommodation costs in the Rhein-Erft district is not conclusive
Source: RA Hötte, ES 50, Roderburgmühle 4, 52222 Stolberg
3. Decisions of the state social courts on employment promotion (SGB III)
3.1 - State Social Court of Lower Saxony-Bremen, decision of November 16, 2018 - L 11 AL 140/18 B ER
Approval of vocational training allowance for a foreigner (rejected here)
Guiding principle (Juris)
The expectation of legal and permanent residence in the Federal Republic of Germany (as a prerequisite for entitlement to vocational training allowance in accordance with Sections 56ff., 132 Paragraph 1 Sentence 1 No. 2 SGB III) presupposes for asylum seekers that for ex-ante From this point of view, there is a predominantly probable prospect that the person in question will obtain refugee status (§§ 3ff. AsylG) or subsidiary protection (§ 4 AsylVfG).
Such a positive prospect of staying cannot be affirmed in the interim legal protection procedure if the so-called overall protection rate calculated by the Federal Office for Migration and Refugees for the country of origin in question is 35.6% and no individual circumstances have been credibly demonstrated that justify a different expectation.
Source: www.rechtsprachung.niedersachsen.de
4. Decisions of the state social courts on social assistance (SGB XII)
4.1 – Bavarian State Social Court, decision v. June 14, 2018 – L 18 SO 86/18 B ER
Guidance sentence (editor)
On the assumption of debts to the landlord according to Section 36 Paragraph 1 Sentence 1 or according to Section 67 SGB XII, here negative.
Source: socialcourtsability.de
5. Miscellaneous information about Hartz IV, social assistance, asylum law, housing benefit law and other law books
5.1 - Working aid: Family reunification for those with subsidiary protection by Attorney Robert Stuhr, as of November 2018, German Caritas Association eV
Family reunification for people with subsidiary protection
Explanations and advice
Author: Robert Stuhr, legal advisor and head of the educational project Law and Migration (Erding)
As of: November 2018
content
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_ can you support as a consultant?
II Family reunification of other family members
Family reunification via Section 36 Paragraph 2 AufenthG
Family reunification via Section 22 Paragraph 1 AufenthG
Judgment of the VG Berlin of November 7, 2017 on the application of Section 22.1 AufenthG
Relationship of Section 36a to Section 22 Paragraph 1 and Section 36 Paragraph 2
5.2 – Job centers as disciplinary institutions – “Client compliance as a resource”
Interview with Bettina Grimmer about job centers as disciplinary institutions
We wish all readers a peaceful and contemplative Christmas.
Author of the case law ticker: Editor of Tacheles Detlef Brock
Source: Tacheles case law ticker
