Legislator European & Swiss Legal Corpus
I 2023 9 • VG SZ I 2023 9 Dismissed AI-structured

I 2023 9 — Disability Insurance Appeal: Denial of Assistance Allowance Based on Insufficient Evidence of Ongoing Need

Case Number I 2023 9 (SZ_VG_003_I-2023-9_2023-06-12)
Court / Authority
Decision Date
Outcome Dismissed
Jurisdiction Canton of Schwyz — Cantonal Courts (CH-SZ)

Decision Summary (Facts, Holding & Outcome)

AI-structured

The claimant, insured under disability insurance, appealed a decision regarding the denial of an assistance allowance, arguing that the lower court incorrectly assessed the need for assistance following a spinal cord injury that resulted in significant physical limitations and dependence on others for daily activities. The court reasoned that the prior assessment of the need for assistance was based on the claimant's condition at a specific time, and although the claimant's permanent physical deficits were severe, the entitlement to an assistance allowance requires ongoing, regular, and substantial aid in everyday activities, which the evidence presented did not conclusively establish to the degree required by law, thus upholding the denial based on the existing administrative record.

Headnote / Official Regeste

AI-structured
Art. 65 Abs. 2 BGG; Art. 65 BGG; Art. 64 BGG; Art. 66 Abs. 1 BGG — Art. 65 Abs. 2 BGG: The appeal is dismissed because the appellant failed to demonstrate that the decision violates the law or is factually incorrect. Art. 65 BGG: The appeal is subject to the general admissibility requirements of Article 65 BGG. Art. 64 BGG: The request for the granting of legal aid is rejected as the appeal lacks sufficient prospect of success.

Key Legal Issues & Applied Statutory Provisions

AI-structured
Art. 65 Abs. 2 BGG

The appeal is dismissed because the appellant failed to demonstrate that the decision violates the law or is factually incorrect.

Art. 65 BGG

The appeal is subject to the general admissibility requirements of Article 65 BGG.

Art. 64 BGG

The request for the granting of legal aid is rejected as the appeal lacks sufficient prospect of success.

Art. 66 Abs. 1 BGG

Costs are awarded to the respondent because the appeal was unsuccessful.

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 of the Judgment — I 2023 9

\n \n \n \n \n

\n\n| | | |\n I 2023 9 |\n |\n \n\n

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

\n\n| | | |\n |\n Entscheid vom 12. Juni 2023 |\n \n\n

\n \n \n \n \n

\n\n| | | |\n Besetzung |\n lic.iur. Thomas Rentsch, Vizepräsident |\n \n|\n |\n Dr.med. Bernhard Zumsteg, Richter Dr.med. Urs Gössi, Richter |\n \n|\n |\n lic.iur. Josef Mathis, Gerichtsschreiber |\n \n\n

\n \n \n \n \n

\n\n| | | |\n Parteien |\n A.________, \n Beschwerdeführerin, \n vertreten durch Rechtsanwalt 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 (Assistenzbeitrag) |\n \n\n

\n \n Sachverhalt: