Facts
The Compensation Fund of the Canton of Lucerne obliged the municipality of Kriens to make retroactive payments of parity contributions on the compensation that the municipality had awarded to four part-time guardians from 1966 to 1970, charged to the wards' assets. The municipality of Kriens opposed this order, as it was of the opinion that it was not the employer of the guardians, since no salary payments were made by it.
The Insurance Court of the Canton of Lucerne overturned the retroactive payment order, as it was of the opinion that the municipality was not an employer within the meaning of the Federal Old Age and Survivors' Insurance Act (AHVG), since it had not itself paid the compensation, but it was drawn directly from the wards' assets.
The Compensation Fund of the Canton of Lucerne then filed an administrative court appeal to the Federal Insurance Court, requesting that the lower court's decision be overturned and the fund's order be reinstated.
Considerations
The Federal Insurance Court upheld the Compensation Fund's appeal. It stated that the part-time guardians, with regard to their activities, must be considered as employed persons under social insurance law, and their remuneration is therefore relevant salary.
Although the law of guardianship is regulated in the Civil Code, it also contains numerous provisions of public law. The guardian exercises a function of public administration, which serves to realize the substantive civil law. In doing so, he is subject to the supervision of the guardianship authority and must account for his activities.
Even though the guardian acts largely independently and self-determinedly in many individual actions, he lacks the entrepreneurial risk…