Mandatory Social Insurance Double Affiliation Transition

The case concerns the prohibition of double affiliation in mandatory social insurance when an individual transitions from a collective insurance scheme to an individual plan, specifically addressing whether a lapse in coverage between the two statuses triggers liability. The court rejected the appeal, upholding the principle that when an individual moves from mandatory collective insurance to an individual plan, and there is no temporal overlap or mandatory continuation of the former coverage that would constitute double affiliation, the individual must secure continuous coverage under the appropriate scheme as required by the relevant law to avoid a coverage gap.