DECISION
L 8 AY 4/24 NZB
S 20 AY 37/21 Social Court Braunschweig
In the legal dispute
1. xxx,
2. xxx,
1-2 residing at: xxx
2 represented by: xxx
– Plaintiff and appellant –
Legal representative:
for 1-2: Attorney Sven Adam,
Lange Geismarstraße 55,
37073 Göttingen
against
Helmstedt District Social Welfare Office,
represented by the District Administrator,
Conringstraße 27 – 30, 38350 Helmstedt
– Defendant and Respondent –
The 8th Senate of the Lower Saxony-Bremen State Social Court decided on July 17, 2024 in Celle through Judge xxx and Judges xxx and xxx:
The appeal against the judgment of the Braunschweig Social Court of November 29, 2023, is granted upon the plaintiffs' complaint.
The plaintiffs are granted legal aid for the proceedings on the appeal against the refusal of leave to appeal and the appeal on points of law, with the appointment of attorney Adam, Göttingen. Payment in installments is not ordered.
REASONS
The plaintiffs' appeal against the denial of leave to appeal in the judgment of the Social Court (SG) Braunschweig of November 29, 2023, which was filed in due form and time (§ 145 para. 1 sentence 2 SGG), is also admissible in all other respects, in particular because the value of the subject matter of the appeal does not exceed €750.00 (§ 144 para. 1 sentence 1 no. 1 SGG). The dispute concerns the granting of higher basic benefits pursuant to §§ 3, 3a AsylbLG for the period from October 1 to December 7, 2019, as granted by the defendant district in an amended decision of July 21, 2021 (as modified by the decision on the objection of November 15, 2021). With the combined action for annulment and performance (§ 54 para. 1 and 4, § 56 SGG), and with reference to the referral order of the Senate of January 26, 2021 (L 8 AY 21/19), benefits in a constitutionally compliant amount are being claimed (Art. 1 para. 1 GG in conjunction with Art. 20 para. 1 GG). Even if the claim is not specifically quantified or quantifiable, it is certain, given the circumstances, that the value of the subject matter of the appeal will not exceed €750.00 (§ 144 para. 1 sentence 1 no. 1 SGG). The legal dispute also does not concern recurring or ongoing benefits for more than one year (§ 144 para. 1 sentence 2 SGG).
The appeal is well-founded. The Senate attaches fundamental importance to the legal question raised (also) in the appeal proceedings, namely whether the level of benefits to cover necessary personal needs pursuant to Section 3a Paragraph 1 of the Asylum Seekers' Benefits Act (AsylbLG), here for a single adult (No. 1) and a child under the age of six (No. 6) in 2019 (as amended on August 13, 2019), is compatible with the fundamental right to a guaranteed minimum standard of living that ensures human dignity (Article 1 Paragraph 1 of the Basic Law in conjunction with Article 20 Paragraph 1 of the Basic Law) (Section 144 Paragraph 2 No. 1 of the Social Courts Act (SGG)). The statements in the aforementioned referral decision of the Senate regarding the composition of benefits, in particular the exclusion of certain standard-needs-relevant consumer expenditures in the areas of leisure, entertainment and culture as well as education from the benefit calculation and the unilateral consideration of reduced and not increased needs (LSG Lower Saxony-Bremen, decision of 26 January 2017 – L 8 AY 21/19 – juris para. 95 et seq.) can also be applied to the basic benefits applicable for the year 2019, because the calculation or composition of the benefits has remained unchanged in this respect.
With the admission of the appeal, the complaint procedure continues as an appeal procedure; there is no need to file an appeal (Section 145 Paragraph 5 of the Social Court Act).
The decision on costs remains reserved for the appeal proceedings (see Keller in Meyer-Ladewig/Keller/Schmidt, SGG, 14th ed. 2023, § 145 para. 10).
The application for legal aid for the second instance is well-founded. For the aforementioned reasons, there are sufficient prospects of success for the legal action within the meaning of Section 73a of the Social Court Act (SGG) in conjunction with Section 114 of the Code of Civil Procedure (ZPO). Due to their financial circumstances, it is unreasonable to expect the plaintiffs to bear the costs of the proceedings themselves, even partially or in installments. The appointment of legal counsel is based on Section 121 Paragraph 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure (ZPO).
This decision is final and cannot be appealed (§ 177 SGG).
