Job Center judgment: Costs for accommodation must not decrease indefinitely!

Job Center judgment: Costs for accommodation must not decrease indefinitely!

In an important decision, the Cottbus Social Court on July 16, 2025 clarified that JobCenter should not be able to cover the costs of accommodation indefinitely. According to the judgment (AZ S 10 AS 600/21), a affected family with two children lived in a 57 m² 3-room apartment and received 452.04 euros from the job center for accommodation costs. The applicant applied for a move to a larger 68 m² 4-room apartment because the existing apartment had become too small for the family. She received support from a family aid that was a concern for the move due to lack of space. Despite this support, the job center rejected the application because the old apartment was considered sufficient.

After the rejection notice, the woman complained of a comprehensive review, objection and lawsuit. As so often, there was a long legal dispute. The family finally moved to the new apartment and demanded that the accommodation now higher. After all, the social court showed understanding of the difficult situation: it found that the job center can only take over the previous rental amount for a limited period of time and that it must not pay indefinitely. This also means that rental and heating costs have to be dynamically adjusted even after an unnecessary move. The court also emphasized the need to regularly update the adequacy limits for rent interest.

relevant legal framework conditions

This decision of the Cottbus Social Court is of far -reaching importance in the context of social legislation, especially in the area of citizen benefit and basic security. These social support services are based on different target groups: the citizen benefit is intended for employable, while basic security is intended for older and permanently reduced workers. Social assistance is used for people in special situations that do not meet the requirements for the citizens' benefit. This also includes help to live.

The differences between the regulations are particularly interesting: there is only a claim to citizens' money if a person is able to work at least three hours a day. If this ability to work is missing, it may be entitled to social assistance that is regulated in the Social Code XII (SGB XII). In practice, this can mean considerable financial differences for those affected, as the last published judgments show.

The Federal Social Court has decided in several procedures that, for example, children of separated parents are entitled to unabridged social fees, as long as only one parent receives citizen benefit. These regulations also benefit the affected family in Cottbus, which can now hope for a clear legal situation.

conclusion and outlook

The judgment of the Cottbus Social Court illustrates that the social living space is also a good protective that should not be endangered by the arbitrary capacity of the accommodation costs. As a society, we are required to regularly check the adequacy limits and to ensure fair, need -based care for people. The current legal situation could therefore become more important in the future, while many affected people ask themselves how to master the challenges of housing shortage and increasing living costs.

Read more about the most important judgments and developments in the area of citizenship and social welfare on opposite-hartz.de href = "https://acheles-zialhilfe.de/newsticker/acheles-rechungticker-kw-11-2024.html"> tacheles-socialhilfe.de and deeper insights into the differences between civil allowance, basic security and social assistance on Buerger-gelde.org .