Facts
The case concerns the claim of a foster mother for a supplementary pension for a foster child pursuant to the provisions of the Federal Act on Old-Age and Survivors' Insurance (OASI Act). The Federal Social Insurance Court had to decide whether the foster relationship is to be considered "gratuitous" within the meaning of the law and whether the foster mother is therefore entitled to a supplementary pension.
The foster mother Babigna Robbi had taken the girl Chatrina Robbi into her care and upbringing free of charge. However, the child's father paid monthly maintenance contributions, which amounted to more than a quarter of the total maintenance costs. The court therefore concluded that the foster relationship was not considered gratuitous within the meaning of the law and that Babigna Robbi was therefore not entitled to a supplementary pension for Chatrina.
Considerations
According to the established case law of the Federal Supreme Court, a foster relationship is only considered gratuitous if the maintenance contributions made by third parties cover a maximum of one quarter of the total maintenance costs. In the present case, the maintenance contributions made by the girl's father exceeded this limit, even though a portion of it was invested as savings by the guardian.
The court…