Finality of a decision not to enter into proceedings due to lack of local jurisdiction in social insurance law

Facts

Parties and procedural history:

The complainant A. (born 1937) lived in the canton of Glarus until February 2020 and entered the care home of the Senior Centre B. in U. (canton of Zurich) on 18 February 2020. The municipal council of U. rejected her application for registration as a resident with a decision dated 16 March 2021, on the grounds that she was not capable of judgement due to moderate dementia and lacked the intention of a permanent stay. A. filed an appeal with the District Council of Meilen, which granted it with a decision dated 29 September 2021 and instructed the municipality to register A. retroactively as of 18 February 2020. The municipality acknowledged the decision and did not lodge any legal remedy.

In the meantime, the compensation fund of Glarus had issued a decision on objections regarding supplementary benefits for A. on 30 March 2021. A. filed an appeal with the Administrative Court of the canton of Glarus on 11 May 2021. This court informally referred the appeal to the Social Insurance Court of the canton of Zurich, as A. had allegedly moved her place of residence to the canton of Zurich according to the information provided by the residents' registration office. The Zurich Social Insurance Court heard the parties on the question of local jurisdiction and, at the request of the compensation fund of Glarus, stayed the proceedings until a legally binding decision on the place of residence was available. With a decision dated 15 July 2021, the court did not enter into the appeal and referred the matter to the Administrative Court of the canton of Glarus, as A. had not established a place of residence in the canton of Zurich at the time the appeal was filed (11 May 2021). The court rejected a stay of proceedings.

The Administrative Court of Glarus set a deadline for the respondent to file a response to the appeal. Following the District Council decision of 29 September 2021, which recognised A. as having retroactively established a place of residence in the canton of Zurich, A.’s legal representative informed the Administrative Court of Glarus of this decision on 5 October 2021. With an order dated 8 October 2021, the Administrative Court did not enter into the appeal and referred the matter to the Social Insurance Court of the canton of Zurich (Art. 58 para. 3 GSSLA).

On 2 February 2022, A. filed a "request for acceptance of the appeal of 11 May 2021" with the Social Insurance Court of the canton of Zurich, which treated this as a request for revision and, with a judgment dated 16 March 2023, again did not enter into it. A. then filed an appeal in public law matters with the Federal Supreme Court, which granted it.

Considerations

Legal nature and effect of a decision not to enter into proceedings due to lack of local jurisdiction:

The Federal Supreme Court examines whether the decision of the Social Insurance Court of the canton of Zurich dated 15 July 2021, in which local jurisdiction was denied and the appeal was not entered into, is legally binding. Such a decision does not become final, either formally or materially, as long as no negative competence conflict arises or another court takes up the matter. This follows from the nature of the procedure under Art. 58 GSSLA, which conclusively regulates the local jurisdiction of the cantonal insurance courts. Jurisdiction is determined by the civil-law place of residence of the insured person at the time the appeal is filed (Art. 58 para. 1 GSSLA).

Formal finality and inter-cantonal jurisdiction conflicts:

A decision not to enter into proceedings due to lack of local jurisdiction becomes formally final once it is no longer subject to appeal. In cases of inter-cantonal competence conflicts, the appeal period under Art. 100 para. 5 FSCA begins "at the latest" with the second decision issued in one of the cantons. This enables the affected person to appeal both the first and the second decision in order to challenge the unlawfulness of the first decision not to enter into proceedings. In the present case, the decision of the Zurich Social Insurance Court dated 15 July 2021 could only have become formally final upon expiry of the legal remedy period for the order of the Administrative Court of Glarus dated 8 October 2021. Since A. did not appeal either of the two decisions, the question arises as to whether the decision, which does not correspond to the objective legal situation, has become final.

Lack of material finality and self-binding of the court:

A decision not to enter into proceedings due to lack of local jurisdiction does not become materially final, as it does not constitute a binding ruling on the matter. Under Art. 58 para. 3 GSSLA, the authority that considers itself incompetent may either informally refer the appeal to the competent court or issue a decision not to enter into proceedings. Both forms of…