Facts
The dispute opposes Mr. Fellmann to the compensation fund of the canton of Lucerne and the administrative court of the canton of Lucerne. The central issue is to determine who is responsible for ensuring the proper use of the AVS pensions paid to the guardian pursuant to Art. 76 para. 2 OASIO.According to Art. 76 OASIO, it is in principle the responsibility of the compensation funds to take the necessary measures to ensure the appropriate use of the pensions. However, when the pension beneficiary is under guardianship, the pension must be paid only to the guardian or the person designated by the guardian, in accordance with Art. 76 para. 2 OASIO. Furthermore, para. 3 of the same article stipulates that pensions paid to a third party or an authority cannot be offset against claims against the pension beneficiary and must be used exclusively for the maintenance of the beneficiary and the persons for whom he is responsible.
This regulation implies a delineation of competences between the compensation funds and the guardianship and social welfare authorities, which are also interested in the appropriate use of the pensions. According to case law, it is not the responsibility of the AVS implementing bodies to verify how the guardian uses the pension; this assessment falls within the competence of the guardianship authorities.
Considerations
When a guardianship is ordered, the powers associated with it are very extensive and include in particular financial affairs (Art. 413 CC). This means that, in the field of AVS, when a guardianship is ordered, the guardian must determine to whom the pension is to be paid and the compensation fund must comply with his instructions.
The regulation is also very…