Legislator Case Law & Legislation
I 2019 12 • VG SZ I 2019 12 AI generated

Disability Benefits Conditioned on Mandatory Psychiatric Treatment

Case Number I 2019 12
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Switzerland · Canton of Schwyz (CH-SZ)
Decision Date

Legislator summary

AI generated

The case concerns a challenge to a decision by the social insurance office regarding disability insurance benefits, specifically focusing on the imposition of a mandatory psychiatric-psychotherapeutic treatment as a condition for receiving benefits. The appellant contested the requirement for treatment, arguing that they were not obliged to undergo such therapy. The court ultimately affirmed the decision, reasoning that the imposition of a necessary and reasonable treatment measure, such as psychiatric-psychotherapy, falls within the authority of the insurance institution to impose rehabilitative measures, provided such treatment is deemed medically appropriate and reasonably expected to restore the individual's earning capacity, thereby justifying the linkage between continued benefits and compliance with the prescribed therapy.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Disability Benefits Conditioned on Mandatory Psychiatric Treatment: The appellant contested the requirement for treatment, arguing that they were not obliged to undergo such therapy. The court ultimately affirmed the decision, reasoning that the imposition of a necessary and reasonable treatment measure, such as psychiatric-psychotherapy, falls within the authority of the insurance institution to impose rehabilitative measures, provided such treatment is deemed medically appropriate and reasonably expected to restore the individual's earning capacity, thereby justifying the linkage between continued benefits and compliance with the prescribed therapy.

Keywords

AI generated
psychiatric treatment disability benefits mandatory benefit insurance coverage of psychotherapy compulsory medication health insurance
AI generated

Need to analyze how this precedent applies to your matter?

Cross-reference this judgment against statutes, commentaries, and subsequent citing case law inside Legislator AI.

Open in Legislator →

Full text

\n \n \n \n \n

\n\n| | | |\n I 2019 12 |\n |\n \n\n

\n \n \n \n \n \n

\n\n| | | |\n |\n Entscheid vom 10. April 2019 |\n \n\n

\n \n \n \n \n

\n\n| | | |\n Besetzung |\n lic.iur. Gion Tomaschett, Vizepräsident |\n \n|\n |\n Dr.med. Bernhard Zumsteg, Richter Dr.med. Pierre Lichtenhahn, Richter |\n \n|\n |\n lic.iur. Josef Mathis, Gerichtsschreiber |\n \n\n

\n \n \n \n \n \n

\n\n| | | |\n Parteien |\n A.________, \n Beschwerdeführer, \n vertreten durch Rechtsanwalt lic.iur. B.________, |\n \n|\n |\n gegen |\n \n|\n |\n IV-Stelle Schwyz, Rechtsdienst, Postfach 53, 6431 Schwyz, \n Vorinstanz, |\n \n\n

\n \n \n \n \n \n

\n\n| | |

|\n Gegenstand |\n Invalidenversicherung (Leistungen / Auflage einer psychiatrisch-psychotherapeutischen Behandlung) |\n

\n\n

\n \n

Sachverhalt: