Beginn des Rentenanspruchs bei Integrationsmassnahmen in der Invalidenversicherung: Rente erst nach Abschluss der Eingliederungsmassnahmen

Facts

The insured person, born in 1996, completed an apprenticeship as a Produktionsmechaniker EFZ (production mechanic, Federal Vocational Certificate) from 12 August 2013 to 11 August 2016. In December 2016 he registered with the disability insurance for early detection, citing paranoid schizophrenia (first-episode psychosis) and a hospital stay at Clinic [C.] since 5 December 2016.

The IV office Schwyz granted the insured person cost guarantees and daily allowances for a rehabilitation training programme at the [D.] Foundation (originally 16 August 2018 to 15 February 2019, extended to 15 August 2019). After a renewed hospitalisation (16 to 25 July 2019), the measure was terminated as of 16 July 2019. Daily allowances were paid up to that date.

By notice of 27 November 2019, the IV office again granted a cost guarantee for a rehabilitation training programme at the [E.] Foundation (25 November 2019 to 24 May 2020), including daily allowances.

By decision of 13 January 2021, following the pre-decision procedure, the IV office awarded a full disability pension from 1 May 2020. In the appeal proceedings, the insured person requested a pension from 1 November 2017. The Cantonal Administrative Court of Schwyz dismissed the appeal by judgment of 17 May 2021.

Before the Federal Supreme Court, the insured person requested that the cantonal judgment be set aside and that the pension be paid from 1 November 2017. The IV office requested dismissal; the Federal Social Insurance Office waived the right to submit observations.

The sole subject of the dispute is the commencement of the pension entitlement (1 May 2020 according to the lower court and the IV office; 1 November 2017 according to the insured person).

Considerations

The appeal in public law matters is admissible under Art. 95 and 96 FSCA. The Federal Supreme Court applies the law ex officio (Art. 106 para. 1 FSCA), but only examines legal defects that have been raised (Art. 42 para. 1 and 2 FSCA), and bases its review on the facts established by the lower court (Art. 105 para. 1 FSCA), unless an exception under Art. 105 para. 2 FSCA applies.

Under Art. 28 para. 1 InvIA, a pension entitlement exists where the insured person cannot restore, maintain or improve their earning capacity through reasonable integration measures, was incapacitated for work by at least 40% for one year, and is thereafter disabled to at least 40%. Under Art. 29 GSSLA, the entitlement arises at the earliest six months after registration, and not for as long as a daily allowance under Art. 22 InvIA can be drawn.

The lower court established that the clinic reports of 23 January and 27 March 2017, as well as the expert report of Dr. med. [F.] of 11 April 2018, demonstrate the insured person's capacity for integration and that vocational measures were urgently indicated. The IV office was therefore entitled to assume capacity for integration and to regard the end of the second rehabilitation training programme as decisive for the commencement of the pension.

The Federal Supreme Court maintains the principle 'integration before pension': where integration is likely to be possible, a measure must first be ordered. A pension may be granted before the completion of integration measures (possibly retroactively) only if the insured person, due to their state of health, was not or not yet capable of integration (BGE 121 V 190). This also applies to integration measures (Art. 8 para. 3 let. abis and Art. 14a InvIA as well as Art. 4quater ff. InvIO), and even where the measures produce only partial success or fail. The only exception concerns assessment measures which show that no capacity for integration exists.

The two…