Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
Turun HAO 22.6.2005 05/0451/2 AI generated

Social Security Board contract for benefit recovery invalid; court orders full restitution to ex-spouses.

Case Number Turun HAO 22.6.2005 05/0451/2
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Finland (FI)
Decision Date
Outcome Allowed / Granted
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The Administrative Court ordered the Social Security Board to fully repay 2,088 euros paid by spouse A to the Board under a private contract. The Board argued that such recovery agreements are not statutory grounds for reclaiming benefits, but the court found the contract lacked legal basis. Consequently, the court ruled that only provisions explicitly in the Social Security Act permit recovery, rendering the private agreement void and mandating restitution.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Laki toimeentulotuesta 19 §; Laki toimeentulotuesta 20 § 1 mom 1 kohta: A private contract between a social security authority and a recipient for the recovery of benefits is not a statutory ground for recovery; therefore, amounts paid under such an agreement must be returned to the recipient.

Keywords

AI generated
Social Security Act benefit recovery private contract validity statutory grounds requirement full restitution order ex-spouse rights administrative liability

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Laki toimeentulotuesta 19 §
Laki toimeentulotuesta 19 §
Laki toimeentulotuesta 20 § 1 mom 1 kohta
Laki toimeentulotuesta 20 § 1 mom 1 kohta
AI generated
admin_1987_uusimaa-county__1078
Social assistance board ordered refund of accident compensation overlapping with advance social aid period.
kho-precedent_1997_68
Supreme Administrative Court dismissed recovery of student loan funds as income under social assistance law.
admin_1989_turku-and-pori-county__681
Social board's error in awarding child support instead of compensation was not grounds for exemption from repayment.
admin_1996_turku-and-pori-county__636
Court allows maintenance support claim when retroactive duty to pay alimony was established by agreement.
admin_2005_turku__171
Social Board lacked authority to deduct July support from September payment due to pending administrative dispute.

Need to analyze how this precedent applies to your matter?

Cross-reference this judgment against statutes, commentaries, and subsequent citing case law inside Legislator AI.

Open in Legislator →

Full text

Sosiaalilautakunnan alaiset viranhaltijat olivat tehneet puolisoiden A ja B kanssa sopimuksen toimeentulotuen perimisestä takaisin muun ohella puolisoiden omaisuudesta. A oli maksanut sosiaalilautakunnalle sopimuksen perusteella takaisinperintään käytettäväksi 2 088 euroa.

Toimeentulotuen periminen takaisin on mahdollista vain laissa säädetyillä perusteilla. Toimeentulotuen saajien kanssa takaisinmaksusta tehty sopimus ei ole tällainen peruste. Hallinto-oikeus velvoitti sosiaalilautakunnan A:n hakemuksesta palauttamaan puolisoille A:n sopimuksen perusteella maksaman määrän kokonaan.

Laki toimeentulotuesta 19 §

Laki toimeentulotuesta 20 § 1 mom 1 kohta