Legislator Rechtsprechung & Gesetzgebung
ATAS/914/2006 • CJ GE ATAS/914/2006 KI-generiert

Review of Disability Benefit Termination Upheld

Geschäftsnummer ATAS/914/2006
Gericht / Behörde
Rechtsordnung Schweiz · Kanton Genf (CH-GE)
Entscheiddatum
Ausgang Abgewiesen (Dismissed)

Legislator-Zusammenfassung

KI-generiert

The case concerns the review of a lower tribunal's decision that upheld a termination of benefits, where the claimant argued the tribunal failed to properly consider evidence regarding their limited functional capacity following an injury and applied an incorrect standard for assessing disability. The reviewing court determined that the tribunal's decision was supported by substantial evidence, finding that it correctly weighed the conflicting medical and vocational evidence, particularly noting that the tribunal reasonably concluded, based on expert testimony and established regulations, that the claimant retained the residual functional capacity to perform less physically demanding work, despite the claimant's contrary assertions regarding the severity of their limitations.

Legislator-Regeste

KI-generiert

Art. 66 al. 1 LTF; Review of Disability Benefit Termination Upheld: The reviewing court determined that the tribunal's decision was supported by substantial evidence, finding that it correctly weighed the conflicting medical and vocational evidence, particularly noting that the tribunal reasonably concluded, based on expert testimony and established regulations, that the claimant retained the residual functional capacity to perform less physically demanding work, despite the claimant's contrary assertions regarding the severity of their limitations.

Schlagwörter

KI-generiert
Revision von Invalidenleistungen Feststellung der Erwerbsfähigkeit medizinische Überprüfung Einstellung der Sozialhilfe medizinische Beweismittel Sistierung der Invalidenrente

Zitierte Gesetzesbestimmungen

KI-generiert
KI-generiert

Zentrale Rechtsfragen, extrahiert von Legislator

KI-generiert
Art. 66 al. 1 LTF

This provision was cited in the dispositive section regarding the allocation of costs to the appellant.

Fragen Sie sich, wie dieser Entscheid auf Ihren Fall anwendbar ist?

Prüfen Sie diesen Entscheid zusammen mit Bundesrecht, kantonalen Erlassen, Kommentaren und Folgeentscheiden in Legislator AI.

Fall in Legislator öffnen →

Volltext



                 !"

##$

 # %& '%%& $ #%'$ ' &$

'()   * " +,+   



-+ * ..........   !"#$%&   (() '()*!)   +!),-)( . /  01 (!





)(

/ ' $ % %&$  $ 0#%'$ $% ) ! ' 0'' $%   !23)))(45&&6   '()*!)   +!) ,-)( .  (



       

   167%1  

!  ('' ) ('(. 44*9(6&&8: () !  (:(!*  ()(;< 6&&8=

(((!')' > (=

 + )()  '(  ( 9  !  '()  (     '()  '('() )+0?)#< ))6#)9(6&&5=

 @( )(* )(  '() A +   )) ( >(     )(B

C .  )) 0    *) ?)( ('(  ) '( !0)   !   ( '' )   44 *9( 6&&8D  '(( )) *  (()  *9(6&&5'(!*))() D+()) !'): E!A4+&&&:(D:*((()F= ))0+ * )+)!( ()(0 ):  ) GD

# '$ - 1 &$ # %& '%%& $ #%'$ ' &$

* 2,,+   3

4,+5+)) 6 27  8 &9:

4D )A. 0!  ('' ) 44*9(6&&8 )!D

6D + * )A'(())*(()A((!  ('' )   (! D

%D @H))09 D

#D )E'()  0!':*((()): E!A 4&&&:(D

8D * )'(!0). A*(())(()D

5D @H))09 D

"D '' ) @()D8&  :('() 0@'*):(( (()('(!)((?)! %&<(>) : ) '(' 



785%76&&5  1%7%1   (!(! ( 9:!!((.3I J(3:0 55&&#   )( E' (D! ')?)('(G!D! ( )B K  0(E))0!  (()! (9) ( )' !  ))0!=9KE'('(0) : ) '* (()) )(!  =K'()( G)(('(!))D. ! ( ) ) '  )(  !!) !!(!  ))( K 9K ) K  1  ( 9:!!(('((')(() >((((0@  *(!(( ((*9D! ((() ((H  '(* 0  () < )    0  !   ))0! ) @*''  0!)!E'! !(()L()D4%64&5)4&;KD





    G(:: (B (! )B        (( . 9.





' :('(!)((?))) : !E'() )A+:: '(G(::





785%76&&5