Refusal of the IV Office to extend a vocational rehabilitation measure

Facts

S., born in 1973, worked as a pizza maker. Due to an allergy to flour, he filed a claim for disability insurance benefits with a view to being reclassified in a new profession. The IV Office agreed to cover an intensive English language training, a reclassification as a commercial employee, and then training leading to the federal diploma of specialist in finance and accounting. After obtaining the CFC (Federal Certificate of Competence) as a commercial employee, the IV Office granted an extension of the vocational rehabilitation for the first year of this new training, on the condition that the insured person find employment in the commercial field. Failing to find employment within the allotted time, the IV Office decided to terminate the vocational rehabilitation and the payment of daily allowances. The Cantonal Tribunal annulled this decision and referred the case back to the IV Office for a new decision. The IV Office appealed against this judgment.

Considerations

The Federal Tribunal partially upheld the appeal. It considered that the IV Office could not prematurely and unilaterally terminate the vocational rehabilitation measure it had granted, in the absence of a relevant reason such as a breach of the duty to cooperate. The condition imposed by the IV Office regarding the taking of employment was not imperative, but rather aimed at enabling the insured person to meet the admission requirements for the final examinations. Therefore, the IV Office was not entitled to terminate the vocational rehabilitation solely on the grounds that the insured person had not found employment within the allotted time.

H…