Facts
The complainant, born in 1970, last worked as a commercial employee. On 8 January 2012, she registered with the Disability Insurance for benefits due to knee complaints. The IV office of the Canton of Basel-Stadt granted her a full disability pension limited from 1 July 2012 to 31 January 2013 with a decision dated 11 February 2016. This decision was confirmed by the Social Security Court of the Canton of Basel-Stadt with a judgment dated 4 July 2016.
With an application dated 29 May 2017 (received by the IV office on 20 June 2017), the complainant again applied for a disability pension and on 10 November 2017 additionally requested payment of a care allowance. The competent IV office of the Canton of Aargau processed the new application and obtained two multidisciplinary expert opinions: the first opinion from the Centre for Medical Assessment, Basel (ZMB), dated 11 February 2019, and the second from the Assessment Centre BL, Binningen (BEGAZ), dated 8 March 2021. With a decision dated 7 November 2018, the IV office granted the complainant a light care allowance as of 1 July 2018 and a medium care allowance as of October 2018. However, it rejected the pension claim with a decision dated 4 May 2023 on the grounds that obesity did not constitute an invalidating condition.
The Insurance Court of the Canton of Aargau dismissed the appeal against this decision with a judgment dated 8 December 2023. The complainant, with an appeal in public law matters, requests that the judgment of the Insurance Court of 8 December 2023 be set aside and that the IV office be ordered to grant her a full disability pension as of 1 January 2018. The IV office submits that the appeal should be dismissed, while the Federal Social Insurance Office (INO) comments on the matter without submitting an application.
Considerations
The Federal Court first examines whether the lower court violated federal law by rejecting the complainant’s pension claim. The lower court based its decision on the expert opinions, which considered obesity and the associated deconditioning not to be invalidating, as they had neither led to physical or mental damage nor were the result of such damage. Furthermore, weight loss and improvement of physical condition were deemed reasonable and possible, so that the effects of obesity were to be disregarded from the perspective of disability insurance law.
The Federal Court, however, changes its previous case law on obesity. Previously, it was assumed that obesity generally did not constitute disability unless it led to physical or mental damage or was the result of such damage. This view was based on case law on addiction disorders and mild to moderate depression, which has since been abandoned. The Federal Court now recognises that the general treatability of a condition does not per se preclude a pension claim. Rather, it must be examined on a case-by-case basis whether the condition limits earning capacity, regardless of whether it is treatable or not.
The previous special case law on obesity can no longer be maintained, as it is inconsistent with the principle of equal treatment (Art. 8 para. 1 Cst.). The Federal Court emphasises that for disability insurance, it is not the diagnosis that matters, but the effects of a condition on earning capacity. Obesity must be recognised as a chronic, multifactorial disease that can cause significant…