Facts
The dispute concerns the respondent's entitlement to a helplessness allowance under Art. 42 InvIA. This entitlement arises on the first day of the month in which all the conditions are met (Art. 35 para. 1 OInv). The law does not provide for a waiting period for the helplessness allowance for adults (Art. 42 para. 1 InvIA) or minors (Art. 20 para. 1 InvIA). However, according to Art. 42 para. 2 InvIA, a person is considered helpless if they "permanently" need the help or supervision of third parties. This condition is met, according to case law and administrative practice, when the state of helplessness is largely stabilized and essentially irreversible (variant 1) or when the helplessness has lasted 360 days without substantial interruption (variant 2). In the case of variant 1, the entitlement to the allowance arises at the moment when the helplessness can be considered permanent (Art. 29 OInv).Considerations
According to established case law, the duration requirement within the meaning of Art. 42 para. 2 InvIA, in addition to "permanent" helplessness (variant 1), requires that the relevant helplessness is expected to last at least 360 days. However, the Federal Insurance Court has deviated from this case law in ATF 105 V 67,…