DECISION
In the legal dispute
1. xxx,
2. xxx,
3. xxx,
legally represented by:
1. xxx,
2. xxx,
4. xxx,
legally represented by:
1. xxx,
2. xxx,
5. xxx,
legally represented by:
1. xxx,
2. xxx,
Legal representative for 1 – 5:
Attorney Sven Adam,
Lange-Geismar-Straße 55, 37073 Göttingen
– Applicant –
against
Burgenlandkreis, represented by the District Administrator, – Legal Department –,
Schönburger Straße 41, 06618 Naumburg
– Respondent –
The 17th Chamber of the Social Court of Halle, without oral proceedings, decided on September 8, 2025, through the presiding judge, Judge xxx of the Social Court:
1. The respondent is ordered by way of preliminary injunction to:
a. grant applicants 1 and 2 provisional monthly benefits pursuant to Sections 3, 3a paragraphs 1 and 2 of the Asylum Seekers' Benefits Act (AsylbLG) in the amount of €413.00 each for the period from June 17, 2025, until a final decision is reached on the objection of June 3, 2025, but no
later than December 4, 2025, taking into account benefits already received; b. grant applicant 3 provisional monthly benefits pursuant to Sections 3, 3a paragraphs 1 and 2 of the Asylum Seekers' Benefits Act (AsylbLG) in the amount of €341.00 for the period from June 17, 2025, until a final decision is reached on the objection of June 3, 2025, but no later than December 4, 2025, taking into account benefits already received;
c. Applicants 4 and 5 shall each be granted provisional monthly benefits pursuant to Sections 3, 3a Paragraphs 1 and 2 of the Asylum Seekers' Benefits Act (AsylbLG) in the amount of €312.00 for the period from June 17, 2025 until the final decision on the objection of June 3, 2025, but no later than December 4, 2025, taking into account benefits already received.
2. Furthermore, the application is rejected.
3. The respondent shall reimburse the applicants for their necessary extrajudicial costs.
REASONS
I.
The applicants are requesting higher benefits under the Asylum Seekers' Benefits Act (AsylbLG).
Applicant 1, born on [date redacted], and Applicant 2, born on [date redacted], were born in [city redacted], Russian Federation, according to their respective certificates of birth and residence dated April 9, 2024, and are Russian nationals. According to their application for benefits under the Asylum Seekers' Benefits Act (AsylbLG) dated May 30, 2024, they are married. Their children, according to the certificate of birth and residence of Applicant 2, are Applicant 3 (born on [date redacted]), Applicant 4 (born on [date redacted]), and Applicant 5 (born on [date redacted]), all of whom were also born in [city redacted]. Applicants 1 and 2 hold temporary residence permits valid until October 21, 2025.
By decision dated May 29, 2024, the respondent granted the applicants cash benefits pursuant to Section 3 of the Asylum Seekers' Benefits Act (AsylbLG) and accommodation in kind, effective May 30, 2024. For May 2024, applicant 1 was granted €12.53, applicant 2 €24.80, and applicants 3 to 5 €20.13 each. From June 2024, applicants 1 and 2 were each granted €371.85, and applicants 3 to 5 €301.90 each. Applicants 3 to 5 were also each granted immediate supplements pursuant to Section 16 of the Asylum Seekers' Benefits Act (AsylbLG). By amended decision dated December 12, 2024, the respondent granted reduced benefits effective January 2025, namely €357.56 per month for applicants 1 and 2, €310.43 per month for applicant 3, and €289.32 per month for applicants 4 and 5. These amounts include a deduction for a share of electricity costs. Applicants 3 through 5 were also each granted an immediate supplement of €20.00 pursuant to Section 16 of the Asylum Seekers' Benefits Act (AsylbLG). The decision contains the following verbatim instructions on legal remedies:
"You may file an objection to this decision within one month of its notification. The objection must be submitted in writing to the Burgenlandkreis district office, Schönburger Straße 41, 06618 Naumburg. The written form requirement is also met by sending an email with a qualified electronic signature to burgenlandkreis@blk.de or by sending a sender-authenticated De-Mail to burgenlandkreis@blk.de-mail.de."
By amendment notice dated 08.4.2025, the respondent granted applicants 3 to 5 a higher immediate supplement pursuant to Section 16 AsylbLG in the amount of €25.00 each, effective from January 2025.
By letter from their lawyer dated June 3, 2025, the applicants lodged an objection against the decision of December 12, 2024; the objection was unfounded.
On June 5, 2025, the applicants applied to the Social Court of Halle for preliminary legal protection and ultimately requested:
The respondent is ordered by way of preliminary injunction to grant the applicants the requested benefits provisionally and subject to the right of recovery until a final and binding decision is reached on the applicants' objection of June 3, 2025, against the respondent's decision of December 12, 2024 (File No.: IV/33.3.3/334001/RUS 76224) as amended by the decision of April 8, 2025, taking into account the legal opinion of the court, in accordance with Section 28a Paragraph 5 of the German Social Code, Book XII (SGB XII), and without the deduction for the "electricity share".
In support of their appeal, they essentially argued that the objection was admissible; the one-year time limit of Section 66 Paragraph 2 of the Social Court Act (SGG) applied. When calculating the benefits for the applicants, the benefit rates applicable until December 31, 2024, must be taken into account in accordance with Section 28a Paragraph 5 of the Social Code, Book XII (SGB XII).
The respondent argued that the decision of December 12, 2024, included proper instructions on legal remedies. The objection of June 3, 2025, was therefore untimely, and the decision was legally binding. The applicants no longer had a right to a decision on the merits.
For further details of the facts and the legal arguments, reference is made to the court file and the respondent's performance files.
II.
The application for a preliminary injunction is partially inadmissible. Otherwise, it is admissible and well-founded.
The procedural claim (subject matter of the dispute) in these preliminary injunction proceedings seeks to compel the respondent, by court order, to grant the applicants provisionally higher benefits under Sections 3 and 3a of the Asylum Seekers' Benefits Act (AsylbLG) for the period from June 5, 2025, to December 4, 2025, without deduction of an electricity cost allowance. The limitation of the claim to this period results from the interpretation of the applicants' submissions. After the court indicated that a provisional obligation on the respondent could be imposed for a maximum of six months from the date the application for preliminary injunction was received by the court, the applicants, through their attorney, stated that they had no objections in this regard. The court infers from this statement that the procedural claim is limited to the period from June 5, 2025, to December 4, 2025. Higher immediate supplements are not at issue.
The application for preliminary legal protection initially lacked a legitimate interest in legal protection. The principles regarding the requirement of a legitimate interest in legal protection also apply in proceedings under Section 86b Paragraph 2 Sentence 2 of the Social Court Act (SGG) – such as the present case. This is because the underlying principle, that no one may burden the courts (and authorities) as part of the state's power unnecessarily or even unfairly, or exploit a legally provided procedure to pursue objectives contrary to its intended purpose and thus not contrary to the protection afforded to the state, is not dependent on the type of procedure (cf. Federal Court of Justice (BGH), Decision of June 18, 1970 – X ZB 2/70 –, juris, para. 13).
The need for legal protection through a preliminary injunction exists if the court decision provides the applicant with an actual or legal advantage and they cannot achieve their request in a simpler, faster, and less expensive way. However, a need for legal protection can only be affirmed if the applicant has previously contacted the administration, submitted an application for the benefit, and waited for the normal processing time. Exceptionally, a need for legal protection may exist even without a formal application to the administration if the matter is very urgent and the applicant, for specific reasons, can reasonably expect that they will not be heard by the administration (see Meyer-Ladewig/Keller/Schmidt SGG/Keller, 14th ed. 2023, SGG § 86b para. 26b, beck-online).
Although the respondent had already decided on the applicants' benefit claims for the period in dispute with the contested decision of December 12, 2024, and upheld the previously granted benefit amount with the amendment decision of April 8, 2025, with the exception of the higher immediate supplement pursuant to Section 16 of the Asylum Seekers' Benefits Act (AsylbLG) for applicants 3 to 5, the applicants should have substantiated their objection and allowed the respondent a reasonable period of time to consider it, notwithstanding the fact that the instructions on legal remedies were defective and, consequently, the deadline of Section 66 Paragraph 2 Sentence 1 of the Social Court Act (SGG) applies. This requirement arises in the present case solely from the fact that the objection was presumably filed more than four months after notification (§ 37 para. 2 SGB X) and that the respondent had meanwhile issued the amended decision of April 8, 2025, which itself was not challenged by an objection. In light of this, the applicants could not assume that the respondent would review the previous benefit award without a statement of grounds for the objection of June 3, 2025, including its admissibility. However, in the written submission of June 17, 2025, the respondent took the position in the proceedings that the amended decision of December 12, 2024, had become legally binding. With this, he made it clear that he intended to uphold the decision of December 12, 2024. Therefore, a need for legal protection must be assumed from this point onward.
Regarding the period in dispute, beginning on or after June 17, 2025, a preliminary ruling by court order has proven necessary following a summary review. The applicants have substantiated their claim and grounds for such an order.
The preliminary legal protection sought by the applicants is governed by Section 86b Paragraph 2 Sentence 2 of the Social Court Act (SGG). According to Section 86b Paragraph 2 Sentence 2 SGG, the court of first instance may, upon application, issue a preliminary injunction concerning a disputed legal relationship if such a ruling appears necessary to avert substantial disadvantages. The injunction may be issued if the applicant credibly demonstrates that a right asserted against the respondent exists (claim for an injunction) and that the applicant would suffer substantial disadvantages without the issuance of the requested injunction (ground for an injunction).
The claim for an injunction and the grounds for the injunction are interrelated in such a way that the more likely the existence of the former is, the less stringent the requirements for substantiating the former. Substantiating both the claim for an injunction and the grounds for the injunction is mandatory. This substantiation encompasses not only the underlying facts but also the legal aspects.
The applicants are eligible for benefits within the meaning of Section 1 of the Asylum Seekers' Benefits Act (AsylbLG) and are entitled to basic benefits pursuant to Section 3 Paragraph 1 of the AsylbLG. According to Section 3 Paragraph 1 Sentence 1 of the AsylbLG, these include benefits to cover the need for food, accommodation, heating, clothing, healthcare, and household goods and consumables (essential needs), and according to Section 3 Paragraph 1 Sentence 2 of the AsylbLG, additionally, benefits to cover personal needs of daily life (essential personal needs).
The applicants are entitled to higher monthly monetary benefits for the period in dispute in accordance with Sections 3 and 3a of the Asylum Seekers' Benefits Act (AsylbLG).
Applicants 1 and 2 each hold a residence permit pursuant to Section 55 of the Asylum Act and are therefore entitled to benefits under Section 1 Paragraph 1 Number 1 of the Asylum Seekers' Benefits Act. The entitlement to benefits of applicants 3 to 5 is based in any case on Section 1 Paragraph 1 Number 6 of the Asylum Seekers' Benefits Act.
The respondent is ordered to grant applicants 1 and 2 monthly cash benefits in the amount of €413.00 each, taking into account standard benefit level 2, for the period from June 17, 2025 to December 4, 2025, pursuant to Sections 3, 3a paragraphs 1 and 2 of the Asylum Seekers' Benefits Act (AsylbLG) in conjunction with No. 1 letter b) aa) and No. 2 letter b) aa) of the announcement of October 19, 2023 (Federal Law Gazette I, 2023, No. 288, pp. 1-2), and to grant applicant 3 a cash benefit in the amount of €413.00, taking into account standard benefit level 5, for the period from June 17, 2025 to December 4, 2025, pursuant to Sections 3, 3a paragraph 1 No. 5 and paragraph 2 No. 5 of the Asylum Seekers' Benefits Act (AsylbLG). No. 1 lit. e) and No. 2 lit. e) of the announcement of October 19, 2023 (Federal Law Gazette I, 2023, No. 288, pp. 1-2) in the amount of €341.00 per month, and to applicants 4 and 5, taking into account standard benefit level 6 for the period from June 17, 2025 to December 4, 2025, pursuant to Sections 3, 3a para. 1 no. 6 and para. 2 no. 6 of the Asylum Seekers' Benefits Act (AsylbLG) in conjunction with No. 1 lit. f) and No. 2 lit. f) of the announcement of October 19, 2023 (Federal Law Gazette I, 2023, No. 288, pp. 1-2), in the amount of €312.00 per month each. Benefits already received will be taken into account. When determining the benefit amount for the partial periods from June 17, 2025 to June 30, 2025 and from December 1, 2025 to December 4, 2025, it must be taken into account, in accordance with Section 3 Paragraph 5 Sentence 2 of the Asylum Seekers' Benefits Act (AsylbLG), that the month is calculated as having 30 days. Electricity costs are not to be deducted in accordance with Section 3a Paragraph 2 of the AsylbLG. The immediate supplements granted to applicants 3 to 5 pursuant to Section 16 of the AsylbLG are undisputed.
The monetary amounts considered in the decision of December 12, 2024, are based on the announcement of October 23, 2024 (Federal Law Gazette I, 2023, No. 325, pp. 1-2). However, this announcement is incompatible with Section 3a Paragraph 4 Sentence 1 of the Asylum Seekers' Benefits Act (AsylbLG) in conjunction with Section 1 Paragraph 2 Sentence 3 of the RBSFV 2025 in conjunction with Section 28a Paragraph 5 of the German Social Code, Book XII (SGB XII).
It is disputed whether the announcement pursuant to Section 3a Paragraph 4 Sentence 3 of the Asylum Seekers' Benefits Act (AsylbLG) is purely informational in nature for the purpose of uniform application of the law and thus merely declaratory, or whether it has a legally binding character (see an overview of the dispute in Frerichs in: Schlegel/Voelzke, jurisPK-SGB XII, 4th ed., Section 3a AsylbLG (as of April 8, 2025), para. 126 et seq.). However, this dispute can remain unresolved here, because either the announcement contains incorrect information from the Federal Ministry of Labor and Social Affairs (BMAS) (if it is merely informational) or it violates higher-ranking law (if it is legally binding).
According to Section 3a Paragraph 4 Sentence 1 of the Asylum Seekers' Benefits Act (AsylbLG), Section 28a Paragraph 5 of the German Social Code, Book XII (SGB XII) in conjunction with Section 1 Paragraph 2 Sentence 3 of the RBSFV 2025 (Regulation on the Adjustment of Benefits for Asylum Seekers) applies to the updating of the monetary amounts in Section 3a Paragraphs 1 and 2 of the AsylbLG. This is the result of the interpretation of Section 3a Paragraph 4 Sentence 1 of the AsylbLG.
According to the wording of Section 3a Paragraph 4 Sentence 1 of the Asylum Seekers' Benefits Act (AsylbLG), the monetary amounts pursuant to Section 3a Paragraphs 1 and 2 of the AsylbLG are "adjusted annually on January 1st in accordance with the rate of change pursuant to Section 28a of the Twelfth Book of the Social Code in conjunction with the Ordinance on the Adjustment of Standard Needs Levels pursuant to Section 40 Sentence 1 Number 1 of the Twelfth Book of the Social Code." The adjustment is thus linked to the rate of change.
According to the legislator's intent, Section 3a Paragraph 4 of the Asylum Seekers' Benefits Act (AsylbLG) is meant to ensure that the amount of monetary benefits under Section 3a AsylbLG develops analogously to benefits under Book XII of the German Social Code (SGB XII). This can be seen in the legislative materials for the predecessor provision, Section 3 Paragraph 4 AsylbLG (draft bill of the Federal Government of September 22, 2014, Bundestag printed matter 18/2592, page 24 [regarding number 4, letter c]), which expired on August 31, 2019. There it states:
"The previous regulation regarding benefit adjustments in Section 3, Paragraph 3 is replaced by a new regulation regarding the updating of benefits in Paragraph 4. The calculation of benefits under the German Social Code, Book XII (SGB XII) and the Asylum Seekers' Benefits Act (AsylbLG) is based on a uniform data basis from the special evaluation – the 2008 Income and Expenditure Survey (EVS 2008). Since the difference between the maximum calculated needs under the AsylbLG and SGB XII is only about ten percent, the needs under the AsylbLG can be updated using the same update mechanism as under the SGB XII."
This leads to the central principle for adjusting basic benefits: the needs under the Asylum Seekers' Benefits Act (AsylbLG) are to be adjusted using the same "update mechanism" as in Book XII of the German Social Code (SGB XII). For the so-called analogous benefits under Section 2 of the AsylbLG, Section 2 Paragraph 1 Sentence 4 of the AsylbLG refers to the Standard Needs Assessment Act and Sections 28a and 40 of Book XII of the German Social Code (SGB XII).
Section 28a, paragraph 5 of the German Social Code, Book XII (SGB XII), which came into force on January 1, 2023, became part of this adjustment mechanism. This follows directly from Section 28a, paragraph 1 of the SGB XII (in the version applicable since January 1, 2023). This provision expressly stipulates that for the years until the next recalculation pursuant to Section 28 of the SGB XII, the standard benefit rates are adjusted on January 1st of each year in accordance with paragraphs 2 to 5 of Section 28a of the SGB XII. Section 28a, paragraph 5 of the SGB XII provides that the euro amounts determined for the previous year remain valid until a subsequent adjustment results in higher euro amounts, if the adjustment pursuant to Section 28a, paragraphs 2 to 4 of the SGB XII results in euro amounts for the standard benefit rates that are lower than the euro amounts applicable in the previous year.
Paragraph 5 of Section 28a of the German Social Code, Book XII (SGB XII) was incorporated into the SGB XII by the Twelfth Act Amending Book Two of the Social Code and Other Laws – Introduction of a Citizen's Income (Citizen's Income Act) of December 16, 2022 (Federal Law Gazette I, No. 51, p. 2328). The explanatory memorandum to the draft bill of the Federal Government (Bundestag printed matter 20/3873, p. 110) states the following regarding Section 28a, paragraph 5 of the SGB XII:
"In exceptional cases, the annual adjustment of the standard benefit rates may, due to corresponding changes in the mixed index and the current change rates of the price index relevant to standard benefit rates in the second quarter, result in the standard benefit rates for the coming calendar year being lower than in the current calendar year. This is prevented by paragraph 5. The applicable amounts continue to be paid until an adjustment results in a higher amount. Comparable provisions have existed in the past in laws determining standard benefit rates when the amount of a standard benefit rate was lower than the applicable amount after recalculation. The difference is reduced by the subsequent adjustment(s)."
In this respect, the reference in Section 2 Paragraph 1 Sentence 4 of the Asylum Seekers' Benefits Act (AsylbLG) to the Standard Needs Assessment Act and Sections 28a and 40 of the SGB XII supports the application of Section 28a Paragraph 5 of the SGB XII to the adjustment of monetary amounts pursuant to Section 3a Paragraphs 1 and 2. Otherwise, there would be a risk of basic benefits and analogous benefits diverging. There is no indication that the legislator considered such a development within the asylum seekers' benefits system when introducing Section 28a Paragraph 5 of the SGB XII.
Finally, Section 3a Paragraph 4 Sentence 1 of the Asylum Seekers' Benefits Act (AsylbLG) was amended; the provision remains in force in the version of the Act of December 9, 2020 (Federal Law Gazette I, No. 61, p. 2855). This also illustrates that the legislator intended to maintain the concept of continuing benefits under the AsylbLG and the German Social Code, Book XII (SGB XII) using the same continuation mechanism. The legislator had not used the effects of the Federal Constitutional Court's decision of October 19, 2022 (– 1 BvL 3/21 –, juris) on the regulatory concept of Section 3a Paragraph 1 No. 2 Letter b, Paragraph 2 No. 2 Letter b of the AsylbLG and Section 2 Paragraph 1 Sentence 4 No. 1 of the AsylbLG as an opportunity to amend Section 3a of the AsylbLG.
Pursuant to Section 40 Sentence 1 No. 1 of the German Social Code, Book XII (SGB XII), the Federal Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs is authorized, in agreement with the Federal Ministry of Finance, to determine by statutory instrument with the consent of the Bundesrat (Federal Council), among other things, the relevant percentages for updating the standard benefit levels pursuant to Section 28a SGB XII and for updating the partial amount pursuant to Section 34 Paragraph 3a Sentence 1 SGB XII, and pursuant to No. 2, to supplement the annexes to Sections 28 and 34 SGB XII with the standard benefit levels resulting from the update pursuant to No. 1 as of January 1 of each year, as well as with the partial amounts resulting from the update pursuant to Section 34 Paragraph 3a Sentences 1 and 2 SGB XII.
In Section 1 Paragraph 2 Sentence 2 of the RBSFV 2025 (Regulation on Standard Benefit Rates for Asylum Seekers), which is based on Section 40 Sentence 1 No. 1 of the German Social Code, Book XII (SGB XII), the legislator stipulates that the euro amounts for the standard benefit rates resulting from the update as of January 1, 2025, are lower than the euro amounts determined for 2024. Therefore, the euro amounts for 2024 will continue to apply from January 1, 2025 (Section 1 Paragraph 2 Sentence 3 RBSFV 2025). Due to the reference in Section 3a Paragraph 4 Sentence 1 of the Asylum Seekers' Benefits Act (AsylbLG), this also applies to the monetary amounts according to Section 3a Paragraphs 1 and 2 of the AsylbLG.
If, after all considerations, the respondent is required to continue applying the benefit rates of the announcement of October 19, 2023 (Federal Law Gazette I, 2023, No. 288, pp. 1-2) from January 1, 2025, to December 31, 2025, the decision of December 12, 2024, is also unlawful insofar as the respondent deducts an amount for electricity costs from the benefit amount for necessary needs, contrary to the provisions of Section 3 in conjunction with Section 3a Paragraph 2 of the Asylum Seekers' Benefits Act (AsylbLG). Since the Third Act Amending the Asylum Seekers' Benefits Act (AsylbLG) entered into force on September 1, 2019, the standard needs-related consumption expenditures of Section 4 (housing repairs and household energy) have been removed from the cash benefits for covering necessary needs (Section 3a Paragraph 2 AsylbLG). This need is covered separately in accordance with Section 3 Paragraph 3 Sentence 3 of the Asylum Seekers' Benefits Act (see, for example, Frerichs in: Schlegel/Voelzke, jurisPK-SGB XII, 4th edition, Section 3a AsylbLG (as of April 8, 2025), marginal note 28). A reduction of the cash benefits by a share of electricity costs therefore violates Section 3a Paragraph 2 of the AsylbLG.
The regulatory order is necessary to avert significant disadvantages for the applicants for the period from June 17, 2025, to December 4, 2025. This requirement stems from the fact that the respondent granted basic benefits under Sections 3 and 3a of the Asylum Seekers' Benefits Act (AsylbLG) at an insufficient amount. The cash benefits included in the decision of December 12, 2024, to cover necessary personal needs (Sections 3 Paragraph 1 Sentence 2, 3a Paragraph 1 No. 1 AsylbLG) are intended to guarantee a dignified minimum standard of living based on the socio-cultural minimum standard of living (see Lower Saxony-Bremen State Social Court, decision of January 26, 2021 – L 8 AY 21/19 –, juris, para. 95). In determining these benefits, the legislature has not sufficiently demonstrated that the length of stay has a concrete impact on subsistence needs and to what extent this could justify the legally established amount of cash benefits (see Lower Saxony-Bremen State Social Court, loc. cit.). This applies all the more since the extension of the waiting period in Section 2 Paragraph 1 Sentence 1 of the Asylum Seekers' Benefits Act (AsylbLG) to 36 months by the Act to Improve Returns (Returns Improvement Act) of February 21, 2024 (Federal Law Gazette I, No. 54, pp. 1-14). Therefore, even falling below the currently applicable cash benefit amounts generally constitutes sufficient evidence of significant disadvantages. Higher requirements for substantiating the grounds for the order are not applicable in this case. In particular, it cannot be assumed that the amount of benefits falls below a de minimis threshold. In the present dispute concerning the correct calculation of monthly basic benefits, the monthly amounts in dispute do not fall below a legally de minimis threshold that is difficult to define. Furthermore, less stringent requirements should be placed on the existence of grounds for an injunction if, upon examination of the facts and the law – as in the present case – success in the main proceedings is highly probable.
The substantiation of the grounds for the order is not precluded by any potential legal force of the decision of 12 December 2024.
If a legally binding decision regarding benefits under the Asylum Seekers' Benefits Act (AsylbLG) is to be revoked, applicants are generally expected to await the decision in the procedure provided for under Section 9 Paragraph 4 Sentence 1 AsylbLG in conjunction with Section 44 of the German Social Code, Book X (SGB X), i.e., in the administrative proceedings and, if necessary, in subsequent main court proceedings. If, in addition, a preliminary ruling by court order is sought, exceptionally strict requirements for substantiating the grounds for the order must be imposed, even in the area of asylum seekers' benefits law, and it is necessary to demonstrate massive infringements on the applicant's social and economic existence with significant effects on their living conditions (see Social Court Halle (Saale), decision of November 8, 2018 – S 17 AY 42/18 ER –, para. 40, juris).
The decision of December 12, 2024 has not become legally binding.
The admissibility of an objection generally requires that it be lodged within one month of the contested administrative act being served on the aggrieved party (§ 84 para. 1 sentence 1 SGG). According to § 84 para. 1 sentence 1 SGG, the objection must be submitted in writing, electronically in accordance with § 36a para. 2 SGB I, in a manner that substitutes for written form in accordance with § 36a para. 2a SGB I and § 9a para. 5 OZG, or recorded at the office that issued the administrative act within one month of the administrative act being served on the aggrieved party.
The respondent's case file does not indicate when the decision of December 12, 2024, was mailed. However, assuming it was mailed no later than December 13, 2024, the deadline under Section 84 Paragraph 1 Sentence 1 of the Social Court Act (SGG) would have expired on January 17, 2025, taking into account the notification on December 17, 2024 (4 days after mailing; Section 37 Paragraph 2 Sentence 1 of the German Social Code, Book X (SGB X)), and thus upon filing the objection by letter on June 3, 2025.
The time limit for filing an appeal only begins to run once the party concerned has been informed of this right. If the information was omitted or incorrect, an appeal may generally be lodged within one year of notification, regardless of the cause of the missed deadline. This follows from Section 84 Paragraph 2 Sentence 3 of the Social Court Act (SGG) in conjunction with Section 66 of the SGG. The specific details that an instruction must contain to be considered correct are determined by the specific regulations for the various legal remedies and by Section 66 Paragraph 1 of the SGG (see Federal Social Court (BSG), Judgment of September 27, 2023 – B 7 AS 10/22 R –, juris, para. 14).
The required content of a legal remedy notice regarding an objection includes information on the formal requirements to be observed when lodging it, as well as, in principle, information on the possibility of lodging an objection in electronic form (see BSG, aaO., Rn. 15).
The respondent provided incorrect information in the decision of December 12, 2024, regarding the possibility of filing an objection electronically or in a form that substitutes for written form, pursuant to Section 36a, paragraphs 2 and 2a of the German Social Code, Book I (SGB I). Therefore, the objection to the decision was filed within one year of its notification, and thus on June 3, 2025, within the prescribed time limit.
According to Section 36a Paragraph 2 Sentence 2 of the German Social Code, Book I (SGB I), an electronic document satisfies the electronic form requirement if it is provided with a qualified electronic signature. The written form requirement can be replaced, among other things, according to Section 36a Paragraph 2a No. 2 Letter a) of the SGB I, by transmitting a declaration electronically signed by the declarant to the authority from a special electronic mailbox for lawyers pursuant to Sections 31a and 31b of the German Federal Lawyers' Act (BRAO) or from a corresponding electronic mailbox established on a statutory basis. Therefore, unlike the electronic form requirement under Section 36a Paragraph 2 Sentence 2 of the SGB I, the filing of an objection that replaces the written form requirement under Section 36a Paragraph 2a No. 2 Letter a) of the SGB I does not require a qualified electronic signature.
The instructions on legal remedies dated December 12, 2024, are incomplete and therefore incorrect. They do not take into account the legally permissible transmission of a declaration electronically signed by the declarant to the authority from a special electronic mailbox for lawyers pursuant to Sections 31a and 31b of the German Federal Lawyers' Act (BRAO) or from a corresponding electronic mailbox established on a statutory basis.
The incorrect legal remedy information regarding the written form-replacing variant of lodging an objection pursuant to Section 36a Paragraph 2a No. 2 Letter a) SGB I means that the one-year period of Section 66 Paragraph 2 SGG applies here.
According to the case file, the court was not notified of a decision regarding the objection at the time the decision was made.
The decision of March 24, 2025 has not become legally binding.
A ground for an injunction generally only exists with regard to services for the present or the near future. This is still the case here, given the period of less than six months.
The decision on costs is based on Section 193 of the Social Court Act (SGG). A cost apportionment is not possible due to the applicants' small share of the losses, which is less than 1/10.
The following is information on legal remedies.
