Facts
The 1984-born [W.] began an apprenticeship as a polymechanic in the summer of 2000, which he broke off in January 2004 for psychological reasons. Since May 30, 2005, he has been treated by Dr. med. [L.] , hospital doctor, FMH psychiatry and psychotherapy, integrated psychiatry, counseling center for youth problems. On February 22, 2006, he applied for benefits from the disability insurance. Subsequently, he requested that the InvIA assume the costs for his training as a journalist at the Stiftung [X.] . After professional and medical clarifications, the InvIA of the canton of Zurich denied the claim for vocational measures.
The insured person lodged an appeal and requested that the InvIA assume the costs for the journalist training. The Social Insurance Court of the canton of Zurich dismissed the appeal. The insured person appealed to the Federal Supreme Court.
Considerations
The Federal Supreme Court applies the law ex officio and is therefore not bound by the arguments raised in the appeal or the considerations of the lower court. It can approve an appeal for a reason other than the one invoked and it can dismiss it with a reasoning that deviates from that of the lower court.
The lower court has correctly stated the provisions and principles on gainful incapacity, disability, the claim to integration measures in general, initial vocational training, and retraining. The integration measure of initial vocational training is subject to the general claim requirements of Art. 8 para. 1 InvIA and thus, in addition to the requirements explicitly mentioned there, such as suitability and necessity, also the requirement of appropriateness (proportionality in the narrower sense) as the third component of the proportionality principle.
The Federal Supreme Court has reviewed the considerations of the lower court and has come to the conclusion that the suitability and necessity of a career change to journalist for the appellant, due to his psychological impairment with the…