Facts
A., born in 1956, first applied to the Disability Insurance (IV) for benefits on December 20, 1994. Her pension claim was rejected by decision of May 14, 1996 due to the lack of a degree of disability entitling her to a pension. The IV office did not enter into a new application dated August 28, 1996. On June 20, 2000, A. applied for benefits again. Based on an interdisciplinary expert opinion attesting to her full work capacity, the entitlement to a disability pension was again denied by decision of April 17, 2002.
On July 29, 2002, A. filed another benefit application, to which the IV office did not enter by decision of September 9, 2002, as a change in the actual circumstances influencing the pension since April 2002 had not been credibly demonstrated. A. appealed against this non-entry decision.
Considerations
According to the case law of the Federal Supreme Court, a prerequisite for entering into a renewed pension application after a previous legally binding pension denial is that the insured person credibly demonstrates a significant change in the actual circumstances for the pension claim.
In examining whether such a claim-influencing change has occurred, the facts at the time of the first rejection decision must be compared with those at the time of the disputed new decision in the new application procedure - analogous to the pension revision under Art. 41 IVG.
Deviating from earlier judgments that focused on the development of circumstances since the original pension decision, the Federal Supreme Court has recently ruled that in the case of multiple legally binding benefit rejections, the facts at the…