Facts
In 2001, the IV-Stelle Uri retroactively granted A. a full disability pension as of November 1, 2000. In the context of a pension review, the IV-Stelle obtained a multidisciplinary expert opinion in 2015, which attested to an 80% work capacity in light to moderately physically demanding work. Thereupon, the IV-Stelle initiated a warning and reflection period procedure and requested A. to participate in a resilience training program. As A. discontinued the training after three days and did not resume it thereafter, the IV-Stelle terminated the pension based on Art. 7b IVG in conjunction with Art. 21 para. 4 ATSG.
A. filed a complaint against the pension termination. The Cantonal Court of Uri dismissed the complaint.
Considerations
The Federal Supreme Court dismisses the complaint. It holds that disability pension recipients are not only entitled but also obligated to actively participate in reasonable reintegration measures, even in the absence of a revision ground within the meaning of Art. 17 para. 1 ATSG. This results from an interpretation of Art. 7 para. 2 lit. e IVG in conjunction with Art. 8a IVG.
The subjective reintegration capacity of the pension recipient is not a prerequisite for the implementation of reintegration measures. The decisive…