L 4 SO 268/21
S 12 SO 22/21 (Social Court Kassel)
DECISION
In the legal dispute
xxx,
Plaintiff and respondent,
Legal representative:
Attorney Sven Adam,
Lange Geismarstraße 55, 37073 Göttingen,
against
Werra-Meißner district, represented by the district committee – Department of Law, Supervision
and Public Order, Public Safety –, Schlossplatz 1, 37269 Eschwege,
Defendant and appellant,
The 4th Senate of the Hessian State Social Court in Darmstadt decided on March 7, 2022, through Judge xxx as rapporteur:
The defendant must reimburse the plaintiff for her necessary extrajudicial costs for the appeal proceedings.
REASONS
Pursuant to Section 156 Paragraph 3 Sentence 2, Section 193 Sentence 3 in conjunction with Sentence 1 of the Social Courts Act (SGG), the court decides, upon application, by order of the rapporteur (Section 155 Paragraph 4 in conjunction with Paragraph 2 Sentence 1 No. 5 SGG), whether and to what extent the parties have to reimburse each other's costs if the proceedings are terminated other than by judgment. The decision on costs only concerns the appeal proceedings, as the main issue has not been resolved by a unilateral declaration of settlement by the plaintiff (withdrawal of the action), an accepted admission of liability, or a joint declaration of settlement by the parties (regarding the decision on costs for all instances in these cases, see, e.g., Federal Social Court decision of May 3, 2018 – B 8 SO 44/17 B – para. 2) (see above; regarding a separate decision on costs for each instance despite the principle of uniformity of the basic decision on costs, see, e.g., Gutzler in: BeckOGK, SGG, § 193 para. 4, and Wehrhahn in: jurisPK-SGG, § 193 para. 15). The defendant has withdrawn the appeal.
The defendant's expenses are not reimbursable (§ 193 para. 4 SGG).
The decision on costs is made at the court's reasonable discretion, whereby the procedural success, as assessed according to the facts and legal arguments at the time of the settlement of the dispute, is generally paramount. In cases of uncertain outcome, a 50% reimbursement of costs may be considered, but the reasons for filing the appeal and the settlement of the dispute may also be taken into account (see, e.g., Federal Social Court [BSG] judgment of December 13, 2016 – B 4 AS 14/15 R – para. 7 and Schmidt in: Meyer-Ladewig/Keller/Leitherer/Schmidt, SGG, 13th edition 2020, § 193 para. 13). Therefore, taking into account all the following circumstances, it is equitable and appropriate to order the defendant to reimburse the plaintiff's necessary extrajudicial costs, because the defendant withdrew his appeal, which he had initially filed on December 27, 2021, to meet the deadline, on January 24, 2022, without providing any grounds for the appeal.
This decision is final and cannot be appealed pursuant to Section 177 of the Social Court Act (SGG).
