Facts
The complainant [B.] submitted an application for assumption of medical expenses within the framework of supplementary benefits on July 21, 2006. The Office for OASI/DI of the Canton of Thurgau, SBA office, rejected the assumption of costs for a dental bill from Dr. med. dent. [W.] in the amount of CHF 2,582.50. The OASI/DI Appeals Commission of the Canton of Thurgau dismissed the appeal lodged against this decision. The complainant filed an appeal with the request that the disputed dental treatment costs in the amount of CHF 2,412.50 plus interest at 5% since July 21, 2006, be assumed by the SBA.
The lower court based its findings on the statement by Dr. [D.] of February 8, 2007, which it set against the contradictory statement by Dr. [W.] of January 24, 2007. The complainant complained of a violation of the right to be heard, as he had not had the opportunity to comment on the reports obtained subsequently.
Considerations
The Federal Court examined the appeal for legal violations pursuant to Art. 95 and 96 FSCA. The lower court had violated the right to be heard by not giving the complainant the opportunity to comment on the reports obtained subsequently.
The Federal Court found that the complaint of violation of the right to be heard can be raised without restriction in the context of establishing the facts. The lower court had not informed the complainant that it was adding new documents to the file that were essential for the decision.
The Federal Court decided that the cantonal appeals commission had violated the complainant's…