1. Decisions of the Federal Social Court on basic income support under the (SGB II)
1.1 – Federal Social Court, judgment of November 26, 2020 (B 14 AS 23/20 R):
Guiding principle Dr. Manfred Hammel:
The assumption of costs for the cryopreservation of sperm cells due to illness, as claimed by a recipient of unemployment benefit II, does not constitute a need that can be subsumed under § 21 para. 6 SGB II.
Cryopreservation of sperm cells is not a medical treatment service according to § 27 para. 1 sentence 1 and 5 SGB V.
This measure serves solely to enable later artificial insemination and not to restore natural fertility.
Section 27a paragraph 4 of the German Social Code, Book V (SGB V) does not apply to benefit claims that were already pending before this provision came into force.
The costs of cryopreservation are neither included in the calculation of the relevant standard benefit (§ 20 SGB II) nor does this measure serve to secure the physical existence of a person.
2. Decisions of the State Social Courts on basic income support for job seekers (SGB II)
2.1 – LSG Baden-Württemberg Judgment of 4 November 2020 – L 2 AS 3911/18
Basic income support for job seekers – reimbursement of costs during a stay in a women's shelter – no time limit on a specific duration – legality of the benefit provision – necessity of the stay
Principle (Juris):
The claim for reimbursement of costs under Section 36a of the German Social Code, Book II (SGB II) is not limited to a specific duration from the outset. Therefore, the provider at the location of the women's shelter is generally entitled to reimbursement of the costs for the (entire) period of the stay in the women's shelter.
Source: lrbw.juris.de
2.2 – LSG Baden-Württemberg, decision of 19.04.2021 – L 2 AS 1032/21 ER-B
There is generally no entitlement to FFP2 masks as an additional Hartz IV benefit
The Stuttgart Higher Social Court (LSG Stuttgart) has addressed the question of whether the job center is obliged to pay a Hartz IV recipient up to 129 euros per month for the purchase of FFP2 masks.
Continue on Juris
3. Decisions of the social courts on basic income support for job seekers (SGB II)
3.1 – SG Gelsenkirchen, judgment from August 7, 2020 – S 44 AS 3425/18
Basic income support for job seekers: Pocket money must be taken into account as income that reduces the need for benefits
Monthly payments of "pocket money" received by a recipient of benefits under the German Social Code, Book II (SGB II), are to be counted as income reducing their need for benefits.
Continue reading on Juris: www.juris.de
Note by Willy Voigt:
Cash gifts to children receiving Hartz IV benefits
Section 11a Paragraph 5 SGB II:
Donations made by another person without any legal or moral obligation to do so are not to be considered as income, insofar as
1. Their consideration would be grossly unfair to the beneficiaries
2. or they do not improve the situation of the beneficiaries to such an extent that benefits under this book would not be justified in addition.
Section 1, paragraph 1, number 12 of the Regulation on Unemployment Benefit II (Alg II-V) clarifies that children of parents in need of assistance – just like children of parents who are not in need of assistance – are also permitted to receive gifts, in particular monetary gifts, to a reasonable extent on the occasion of the aforementioned celebrations (Confirmation, Communion, Confirmation or comparable religious celebrations as well as secular coming-of-age ceremonies) without these being considered as income; see Söhngen in: jurisPK-SGB II 5th edition, Section 11a SGB II, marginal note 88.
According to paragraph 5, monetary gifts are exempt from being counted as income even without being tied to a specific purpose (see the previous legal situation, Saxon State Social Court, April 8, 2010 – L 2 AS 248/09), provided they are given without moral obligation and remain within customary limits. In the case of other voluntary contributions from third parties, the question arises whether they are linked to a prior or reciprocal service provided by the person seeking assistance. If the monetary contribution is so tied to a specific purpose that it cannot be used for living expenses, it cannot be counted as income on principle. (Social Court Speyer, August 15, 2008 – S 14 AS 179/08: Payment of school fees by the separated father; Higher Social Court Berlin-Brandenburg, June 27, 2008 – L 14 B 648/08: Money for the purchase of a suitable car; Higher Social Court North Rhine-Westphalia, December 17, 2009 – L 7 B 351/09 AS: Funding for vocational training; Higher Social Court Lower Saxony-Bremen, December 18, 2012 – L 7 AS 1416/10: Meal/drink money paid directly to the daycare center.) Pocket money from a third party not belonging to the household (grandparents, aunt) remains disregarded within reasonable limits (Bundestag Printed Matter 17/3404, p. 95), whereby the standard of Section 1 Paragraph 1 No. 1 of the Second Book of the Social Code (10 EUR) is not applicable. See Geiger in LPK SGB II (Münder), § 11a Rn 21.
Section 1 paragraph 1 no. 12 of the Regulation on Unemployment Benefit II (Alg II-V): Monetary gifts to minors on the occasion of Confirmation, Communion, Confirmation or comparable religious celebrations as well as on the occasion of the Youth Dedication ceremony, insofar as they do not exceed the amount specified in Section 12 paragraph 2 sentence 1 number 1a of the Second Book of the Social Code,
Section 12 paragraph 2 sentence 1 no. 1a: a basic allowance of 3,100 euros for each eligible minor child.
BSG – B 14 AS 74/10 R [23-08.2011]: No reduction in Hartz IV benefits due to birthday money from grandparents.
tinyurl.com
Social Court Düsseldorf, Judgment of June 7, 2017 – S 12 AS 3570/15: 50 EUR pocket money is not to be counted towards Hartz IV benefits.
tinyurl.com
aA:
SG Gelsenkirchen, Judgment of August 7, 2020 – S 44 AS 3425/18 – not legally binding: Basic income support for job seekers: Pocket money must be considered as income reducing benefits. Monthly payments of "pocket money" received by a recipient of benefits under the German Social Code, Book II (SGB II), must be counted as income reducing benefits.
tinyurl.com
4. Decisions of the State Social Courts on Employment Promotion Law (SGB III)
4.1 – LSG Hessen, decision of 14.04.2021 – L 7 AL 42/21 B ER
Unemployment insurance
Principle (Juris)
1. The extension of the duration of unemployment benefit entitlement by three months applies only to persons whose entitlement would otherwise have expired in the period from 1 May 2020 to 31 December 2020.
2. The relevant legal basis in Section 421d Paragraph 1 of the German Social Code, Book III (SGB III) is not capable of being applied analogously.
3. The limitation of the temporal scope of application of the special regulation does not violate constitutional law.
Source: www.rv.hessenrecht.hessen.de
Note:
Press release LSG Hessen:
Extended unemployment benefits due to the Corona pandemic are only available if the entitlement period ends in 2020
The LSG Darmstadt has ruled that the temporary special regulation extending the entitlement to unemployment benefits by three months is constitutional; however, this only applies to persons whose entitlement to unemployment benefits would otherwise have expired between May 1, 2020 and December 31, 2020.
5. Decisions of the State Social Courts and Social Courts on Social Assistance (SGB XII)
5.1 – LSG Baden-Württemberg Judgment of 2 December 2020 – L 2 SO 219/19
Principle (Juris):
1. A nursing home, as the legal successor of a deceased person in need of care, has no claim to the assumption of nursing home costs if the deceased was no longer in need of care due to the termination of a will. This is because an inheritance where the will has been terminated constitutes available assets.
2. Regarding the conditions for the termination of an executorship (death of the executor and refusal by the family court to appoint a new executor, as there is no longer a need for one).
Source: lrbw.juris.de
5.2 – LSG NRW, Decisions Ref.: L 9 SO 18/21 B ER, L 12 AS 377/21 B ER, L 7 AS 498/21 B ER, L 19 AS 391/21 B ER
SGB II/XII: No additional allowance for FFP2 masks
Recipients of basic income support cannot successfully claim additional expenses for masks compliant with the Corona Protection Ordinance in an expedited procedure.
The LSG Essen recently decided this in four rulings (dated 03.03.2021 – L 9 SO 18/21 B ER -, 29.03.2021 – L 12 AS 377/21 B ER -, 13.04.2021 – L 7 AS 498/21 B ER – and 19.04.2021 – L 19 AS 391/21 B ER).
Source: Press release from the LSG Essen dated April 26, 2021
SG Aachen, judgment of March 19, 2021 – S 19 SUN 59/20
No higher costs for accommodation and heating for tenants of a privately organized assisted living project
The Social Court of Aachen has ruled that tenants of a privately organized assisted living project in Würselen who receive basic income support for the elderly and those with reduced earning capacity are not entitled to higher benefits for accommodation and heating.
Summary:
The amended legislation, effective January 1, 2020, provides for the reimbursement of up to 25% higher costs for accommodation and heating if integration assistance services are used in the rented premises. However, a further requirement is that additional costs be documented and contractually specified that are directly caused by the provision of integration assistance services or are at least closely related to them. Such additional costs, i.e., those exceeding the usual expenses for accommodation and heating, are not apparent to the plaintiff and, in particular, are not specified in the rental agreement that the plaintiff concluded with the operator of the housing project.
An appeal against the decision can be lodged with the State Social Court for the State of North Rhine-Westphalia in Essen.
Source: Press release from SG Aachen dated April 29, 2021
6. Decisions on asylum law and the Asylum Seekers' Benefits Act (AsylbLG)
6.1 – Marburg Social Court, decision of 13 April 2021 – Case No.: S 9 AY 1/21 ER
Legal norms: Section 1a Paragraph 7 Asylum Seekers' Benefits Act (AsylbLG), Section 86b Paragraph 1 No. 2 Social Court Act (SGG) – Keywords: Asylum Seekers' Benefits Act (AsylbLG), doubts about the constitutionality of Section 1a Paragraph 7 AsylbLG
Guidance (Editor):
The provision of Section 1a Paragraph 7 of the Asylum Seekers' Benefits Act (AsylbLG) raises significant constitutional concerns (cf. Higher Social Court of Hesse, decision of March 31, 2020 – L 4 AY 2/20 B ER – Editor's note: possibly incorrect file number, should probably read: L 4 AY 4/20 B ER).
Continued with attorney Sven Adam
7. Miscellaneous information on Hartz IV, social assistance, asylum law, housing benefit law and other legal codes
7.1 – LSG Munich, Judgment of 03.03.2021 – L 13 R 4452/18
Title:
Requirements for entitlement to transitional allowance when receiving unemployment benefit II during inpatient medical rehabilitation
Principle (Juris):
1. If an insured person receives unemployment benefit II before the start of a medical rehabilitation measure, the entitlement to transitional allowance requires that, at least within the two years prior to the commencement of unemployment benefit II, either contributory earnings or earned income were received for at least six months, or corresponding social benefits that were themselves subject to contributions and calculated based on the previously received earnings or earned income. (Editorial principle)
2. Provisional provision of benefits within the meaning of Section 102 Paragraph 1 of the German Social Code, Book X (SGB X) requires that the contacted agency either provides the benefit knowing that another agency is responsible or is demonstrably uncertain as to which other agency is or could be responsible, and this uncertainty is outwardly apparent. The subsequent reclassification of a benefit already provided as a provisional benefit is not permissible. (Editorial note)
3. The right to reimbursement under Section 104 of the German Social Code, Book X (SGB X) presupposes that the insured has an entitlement to the priority benefit. (Editorial note)
Source: www.gesetze-bayern.de
7.2 – Avoid renting an excessively expensive apartment due to the Corona pandemic, an article by attorney Helge Hildebrandt
More information: sozialberatung-kiel.de
Editor's note:
Due to server maintenance, the website www.sozialgerichtsbarkeit.de currently unavailable.
Author of the legal news ticker: Detlef Brock, editor of Tacheles
Source: Tacheles legal case law ticker
