Decision on the remission of the obligation to repay undue supplementary benefits

Facts

This decision concerns an appeal against a decision of the Old Age and Survivors' Insurance (OASIA) of the canton of Aargau and the Cantonal Court of Aargau regarding the remission of the obligation to repay undue supplementary benefits. The main facts are as follows: - According to Art. 3(6) of the Federal Act on Supplementary Benefits (SBA), the Federal Council is authorized to issue more detailed provisions on the reimbursement of benefits. - Art. 27 of the Ordinance on Supplementary Benefits (DRJPO) provides that undue supplementary benefits must be reimbursed by the beneficiary or their heirs, and that the provisions of the Federal Act on Old Age and Survivors' Insurance (OASIA) apply by analogy for the reimbursement and remission of this obligation. - According to Art. 47(1) OASIA, the restitution may be remitted in case of good faith and great hardship. Good faith is not simply the ignorance of the legal defect, but implies that the beneficiary has not been guilty of malicious intent or gross negligence.

Considerations

The decision of the Federal Insurance Court clarifies the case law on the scope of review of the Federal Insurance Court in the appeal procedure concerning the remission of the obligation to repay: - The question of the existence or absence of good faith is a question of fact that binds the Federal Insurance Court under Art. 105(2) FJA. - The question of whether the party to the proceedings can invoke…