Revocation of a half disability pension for syndromes with unclear pathogenesis and etiology without verifiable organic basis

Facts

D., born in 1959, suffered a whiplash injury to the cervical spine in 1996. Based on a psychiatric expert opinion, she received a full disability pension from 1997 to 1998 and a half disability pension from 1998 onwards. This pension was revoked in 2010, whereupon the Administrative Court ordered its continued payment. In 2011, the administration initiated a revision procedure and revoked the pension at the end of June 2012, based on the final provisions of the 6th IV revision.

D. filed a complaint against the pension revocation. The Federal Supreme Court partially upheld the complaint.

Considerations

The Federal Supreme Court states that the revocation of the pension based on the final provisions of the 6th IV revision is permissible, provided the requirements are met. This includes that the pension was granted solely due to a syndrome with unclear pathogenesis and etiology without verifiable organic basis and that such a syndrome is still present at the time of the revision.

Furthermore, it must be examined whether the so-called "Foerster criteria" are met, which can prove disability despite the unclear symptoms. These include severe psychiatric comorbidity, chronic accompanying illnesses, or a consolidated, therapy-resistant course of the disease.

The Federal Supreme Court…