Facts
The case concerns a person born in 1982 named P., to whom the IV-Stelle Bern (Disability Insurance Office Bern) granted a contribution towards the cost of external meals and accommodation for a period of one year in a decision dated September 10, 1996, to ensure the transition from special to regular school. The decision indicated that an extension of this cost coverage would not be possible.
On October 25, 1997, P.'s parents requested an extension of the cost coverage. The IV-Stelle did not enter into this request in a decision dated April 9, 1998, as an extension was not possible according to the applicable ordinance provisions.
The family filed an appeal against this decision, which the Administrative Court of the Canton of Bern upheld in a decision dated December 3, 1998, and referred the matter back to the IV-Stelle for a substantive assessment.
Subsequently, the Federal Social Insurance Office filed an administrative court appeal with the request to set aside the cantonal decision.
Considerations
The Federal Supreme Court states that the case law on Art. 87 (3) and (4) of the IVV (Disability Insurance Ordinance) has always only referred to cases with prior refusal of benefits. It is intended to prevent the administration from having to deal repeatedly with identical and not further substantiated pension applications.
The Federal Supreme Court sees no reason to apply this case law by analogy when a benefit has been granted but limited in time. According to established practice, it is generally not permissible to grant future permanent benefits only for a limited period.
Exceptions to this principle may be…