Job center verdict: Accommodation costs must not fall indefinitely!

Job center verdict: Accommodation costs must not fall indefinitely!

In an important decision on July 16, 2025, the Cottbus Social Court made it clear that job centers are not allowed to cap the costs of accommodation indefinitely. According to the judgment (AZ S 10 AS 600/21), an affected family with two children lived in a 57 m² three-room apartment and received 452.04 euros from the job center for accommodation costs. The plaintiff requested 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 helper who saw a need to move due to a lack of space. Despite this support, the job center rejected the application because the old apartment was considered sufficient.

After the rejection decision, the woman sued after a comprehensive review, objection and lawsuit process. As is often the case, a long legal battle ensued. The family eventually moved into the new apartment and demanded that the now higher accommodation costs be covered. At least the social court showed understanding for the difficult situation: It found that the job center can only cover the previous rent amount for a limited period of time and is not allowed to pay it indefinitely. This also means that rent and heating costs must be dynamically adjusted even after a move is not necessary. The court also emphasized the need to regularly update the reasonable limits for rent.

Relevant legal framework

This decision by the Cottbus Social Court has far-reaching significance in the context of social legislation, especially in the area of ​​citizens' benefits and basic security. These social support services are aimed at different target groups: Citizens' benefit is intended for those who are able to work, while basic security is intended for older people and those with permanent incapacity. Social assistance, in turn, is used for people in special circumstances who do not meet the requirements for citizen's benefit. This also includes help with living expenses.

The differences between the regulations are particularly interesting: a person is only entitled to citizen's benefit if they are able to work for at least three hours a day. If you lack this ability to work, you may be entitled to social assistance, which is regulated in Social Security Code XII (SGB XII). In practice, this can mean significant financial differences for those affected, as the most recently published judgments show.

The Federal Social Court has ruled in several cases that, for example, children of parents who live apart are entitled to full social benefit as long as only one parent receives citizen's benefit. These regulations also benefit the affected family in Cottbus, who can now hope for a clear legal situation.

Conclusion and outlook

The ruling of the Cottbus Social Court makes it clear that social housing is also an asset worth protecting, which must not be jeopardized by the arbitrary capping of accommodation costs. As a society, we are required to regularly review the appropriateness limits and to ensure that people receive fair, needs-based care. The current legal situation could become even more important in the future, while many of those affected are wondering how they should overcome the challenges of the housing shortage and the rising cost of living.

Read more about the most important judgments and developments in the area of ​​citizens' benefits and social assistance gegen-hartz.de, further interesting legal decisions tacheles-socialhilfe.de and deeper insights into the differences between citizens' benefit, basic security and social assistance buerger-geld.org.