Overview of case law
on basic income support, social assistance, asylum seekers' benefits law, citizen's allowance, and employment promotion law
Last updated: July 26, 2026
Editor: Detlef Brock
Publisher: Tacheles Legal News Ticker
1. Decisions of the state social courts on basic income support/citizen's allowance under the German Social Code, Book II (SGB II)
1.1 – LSG Hamburg, judgments of 13.04.2026 – L 4 AS 321/24, L 4 AS 265/24 and L 4 AS 353/24
Topic
: Taking over loan repayments for owner-occupied residential property
Decision:
With a repayment rate of 72.80 percent, the job center will not cover any repayment installments for an owner-occupied property.
Even when home financing is largely complete – here, 72.80 percent – loan repayments are only to be covered in exceptional cases, namely when, without such coverage, there is a concrete risk of homelessness under the specific circumstances of the case. This was denied here, as the plaintiffs used their husband's care allowance for loan repayments.
Source
www.socialgerichtsabilities.de
Note by Detlef Brock:
An exception to the assumption of loan repayments exists only if it concerns the preservation of residential property, the financing of which is already substantially completed at the time of receiving basic income support benefits and the acquisition of the property took place outside of the period of benefit receipt (LSG Hamburg, Judgment of 25.01.2024 – L 4 AS 216/22 D; subsequently BSG, Decision of 10.07.2024 – B 4 AS 20/24 B).
Even with a repayment rate of 74 percent, repayment installments can be assumed if the actual increase in assets occurs through the borrower's own renovation work (LSG Berlin-Brandenburg, Judgment of 19.03.2015 – L 31 AS 3418/13).
1.2 – LSG Berlin-Brandenburg, decision of 14 July 2026 – L 35 AS 415/26 B ER PKH
The issue
of accommodation and heating costs in Berlin – AV-Wohnen is not a coherent concept
Berlin currently lacks a coherent plan!
Berlin job center must recognize full rent costs – comparison with social housing rents required
Guiding principles
- The assumption that AV-Wohnen Berlin does not represent a coherent concept is justifiable.
- In its judgment of November 27, 2025 – B 4 AS 28/24 R – the Federal Social Court (BSG), despite the findings of the Higher Social Court (LSG), questioned the cogency of the AV-Wohnen (Rental Assessment Ordinance) and pointed out that average values must be used when referring to rent index values. However, for the period relevant in that case, the AV-Wohnen only referred to average values of the lower segment ("basic residential location"), without taking the mean values into account. For this reason alone, the concept was not coherent.
- It is justifiable to consider that, when interpreting the indeterminate legal concept of "adequacy," legislative decisions aimed at securing adequate housing for those in need must be taken into account due to its normative preconditions. This is intended to ensure that a comparison with the reference group is successful. In tight housing markets, this also includes a comparison with rents in social housing.
Source:
LSG Berlin-Brandenburg
Comment by Detlef Brock:
The 35th Senate of the Berlin-Brandenburg Higher Social Court (LSG) is strengthening the rights of recipients of citizen's income or basic income support. Thousands of rent assessments issued by job centers may be unlawful. Rent costs cannot be capped without a sound rationale.
Furthermore, a comparison with the rent levels in social housing is recommended
When interpreting the indeterminate legal concept of adequacy, legislative decisions regarding the safeguarding of adequate housing for those in need must be considered due to its normative preconditions. This is intended to ensure a successful comparison with the reference group.
In tight housing markets, this includes comparison with rents in social housing (as also ruled by the 32nd Senate of the LSG Berlin-Brandenburg – L 32 AS 1888/17).
1.3 – LSG Berlin-Brandenburg, Judgment of 23.04.2026 – L 35 AS 238/24
Topic:
Regarding rental costs for relatives without a written agreement
The job center does not pay rent if the rent payments are purely voluntary
Decision:
If there is no written tenancy or sublease agreement, the social welfare office must cover the costs of accommodation and heating for the person entitled to basic income support according to the so-called difference method (reference to BSG, judgment of 23.03.2021 – B 8 SO 14/19 R).
The court did not agree with this view. Basic income support benefits under the German Social Code, Book II (SGB II), are only provided for the costs of accommodation and heating if there is a need arising from genuine legal obligations. If different standards apply under social assistance law, this is irrelevant to the case at hand.
Source
www.socialgerichtsabilities.de
Comment by Detlef Brock:
A payment deferral "involuntarily" granted to a person in need by a relative as a result of the basic income support provider's failure to consider housing costs does not constitute a permanent deferral of rent that would preclude a claim under Section 22 Paragraph 1 Sentence 1 of the German Social Code, Book II (LSG Hamburg, Judgment of September 10, 2021 – L 4 AS 156/20 – referring to BSG, Judgment of May 7, 2009 – B 14 AS 31/07 R).
2. Decisions of the social courts on the new basic income support/citizen's allowance
2.1 – SG Leipzig, decision of 08.07.2026 – S 17 AS 1015/26 ER
The issue of
the assignment notice for an integration measure is unlawful due to its lack of specificity.
Job centers' assignments to vocational integration measures must be specific and clear (following the ruling of the Lower Saxony-Bremen Social Court – L 7 AS 850/16 B ER).
From the perspective of the recipient, the integration administrative act or the offer from the authority must clearly and comprehensibly indicate to the person entitled to benefits what is required of them. The measure must therefore be described in more detail (following the decision of the Lower Saxony-Bremen State Social Court – L 7 AS 1519/15 B ER).
Decision
guidelines (Juris):
- "If an allocation notice establishes an obligation to participate in a measure for activation and vocational integration, the nature and scope of the required cooperation must be sufficiently clear from the notice and the annexes included in its regulatory content. The beneficiary must be able to recognize, from the perspective of a recipient, which specific obligations to participate are imposed upon them.".
- It is the responsibility of the basic income support provider to determine the content and modalities of the specific integration measure. The determination of the essential participation obligations must not be left to the measure provider
Source:
Juris
Comment by Detlef Brock:
An integration measure ordered for a recipient of basic income support for job seekers must be specified in such a way that the recipient can clearly understand exactly what is required of them. This was denied here with regard to the assignment to unspecified measures to support the initiation and commencement of employment subject to social security contributions.
If this specificity is lacking, the imposition of a sanction for non-participation in the integration measure is not an option (LSG Berlin-Brandenburg, decision of 27.07.2016 – L 25 AS 1511/16 B ER).
3. Decisions on employment promotion law (SGB III)
3.1 – No decisions available
4. Decisions on social assistance (SGB XII)
4.1 – LSG Berlin-Brandenburg, Judgment of 23 April 2026 – L 24 SO 148/26 B ER – Appeal allowed
Topic:
Is a BAföG back payment a one-time or a recurring income?
Guiding principles
- By way of a converse conclusion from Section 11 Paragraph 3 Sentence 2 of the German Social Code, Book II (SGB II) in the version applicable until June 30, 2023, it follows that income received as a back payment, which is made for the month of receipt, does not belong to the one-off income, but to the current income.
- The German Social Code, Book II (SGB II), does not recognize a "need for assistance of the entire household" nor a uniform entitlement to benefits for the household.
Note by Detlef Brock:
This contradicts the Federal Employment Agency's Technical Instructions on Section 11 Paragraph 3 of the German Social Code, Book II (SGB II). These are merely internal administrative regulations.
Source
www.socialgerichtsabilities.de
Note by Detlef Brock
: See BSG, Judgment of 11.07.2024 – B 4 AS 14/23 R.
Legal tip: Hamburg Higher Social Court, judgment of 30 April 2026 – L 4 AS 165/24 – appeal allowed
A BAföG (Federal Training Assistance Act) back payment – like back payments of wages (Federal Social Court, judgment of 24 April 2015 – B 4 AS 32/14 R, and judgment of 16 May 2012 – B 4 AS 154/11 R), back payments of sick pay (Federal Social Court, judgment of 16 December 2008 – B 4 AS 70/07 R), back payments of transitional allowance (Federal Social Court, judgment of 7 May 2009 – B 14 AS 13/08 R), back payments of pensions (Federal Social Court, judgment of 29 August 2019 – B 14 AS 42/18 R) and income tax refunds (Federal Social Court, judgment of 16 December 2008 – B 4 AS 48/07 R) – is considered a one-off cash payment. The benefit, as defined in Section 11 Paragraph 3 Sentence 1 of the German Social Code, Book II (SGB II) in its former version, must be taken into account in the month in which it is received. This also applies if it was provided for past periods.
5. Decisions concerning the Asylum Seekers' Benefits Act (AsylbLG)
5.1 – LSG Saxony, decision of 13 July 2026 – L 7 AY 20/25 B ER
Topic:
Benefits under the Asylum Seekers' Benefits Act for the payment of contributions for voluntary membership without entitlement to sick pay in the statutory health and long-term care insurance after termination of compulsory insurance due to employment – so-called mandatory follow-up insurance
Guiding principles
- In preliminary legal proceedings between a person entitled to basic benefits and an authority responsible for implementing the Asylum Seekers' Benefits Act (AsylbLG) concerning the assumption of contributions for voluntary membership in statutory health and long-term care insurance as other benefits, the health and long-term care insurance fund, after being joined as a party, can be provisionally ordered to suspend the enforcement of the contribution claims.
- Until the legislative process for the Benefits Adjustment Act is completed and the subsequent decisions are made regarding the waiver of contribution claims due to unfair collection, these claims are in any case not essential within the meaning of the opening clause of the Asylum Seekers' Benefits Act.
Source
www.socialgerichtsabilities.de
Note on citation style
Unpublished judgments or comments may only be quoted with attribution to the respective source:
- Case Law Ticker: Tacheles Case Law Ticker Week XX/2026 – Author: Detlef Brock
- Newsletter: Thomé newsletter 12/2026 from April 6th, 2026 - Author: Harald Thomé
- License: Creative Commons CC BY-SA 3.0
Quotations without source information are not permitted.
