Petra Hietanen-Kunwald: Lessons to be learnt from Austria, Germany and France. Esitys Muutoksenhaku sosiaalivakuutuksessa -seminaarissa 19.3.2015. Kelan päätalo, Helsinki.

1. Lessons to be learnt
from Austria, Germany and
France
Petra Hietanen-Kunwald, Researcher, HY

2. Purpose of the research
 Background
 Research problem
 Aim
19.3.2015Petra Hietanen-Kunwald

3. Basic Concepts
 Social security
 Social insurance
 Social assistance
 Judicial protection
19.3.2015Petra Hietanen-Kunwald

4. Structural choices
 Structure
 Centralized system
 Integrated system
 Fragmented system
 Administrative – ordinary (civil) court
 Involvement of lay judges
 Appeal system
19.3.2015Petra Hietanen-Kunwald

5. Centralized System
Administrative
Court
Social Court
Ordinary
Court
19.3.2015Petra Hietanen-Kunwald
In a centralized system judicial protection in social security
matters is centralized within one specialized jurisdiction.

6. Integrated System
Administrative
Court
Social
Matters
Ordinary Court
19.3.2015Petra Hietanen-Kunwald
In an integrated sytem judicial protection in social security matters is
integrated into the existing dual system.

7. Fragmented System
Administrative
Court
Social Ordinary
Court
Social
Social
SocialSocial
19.3.2015Petra Hietanen-Kunwald
A fragmented system is characterized by the existence of multiple
specialized bodies that exercise jurisdiction in social security matters.

8. Organization of the social jurisdiction
(Germany)
Federal Social Court
3 professional judges and 2 lay judges
Regional Social Court (Landessozialgericht)
3 professional judges and 2 lay judges
Social Court (Sozialgericht)
1 professional judge and two lay judges
19.3.2015Petra Hietanen-Kunwald

9. Lay judges
 Involvement of lay judges
 Purpose
 Discussions
 Independence of lay judges
 Justification of lay judge system
 Tendencies
 Strengthening the role of the single judge
19.3.2015Petra Hietanen-Kunwald

10. Participation
 The right to be heard
 Oral proceedings
 Effective access to justice - instruction
 Dialogue with the parties
 Acceptance of the decision
 Alternatives to judgments
19.3.2015Petra Hietanen-Kunwald

11. Numbers
(2012)
Percentage
(2012)
Total number of cases 399.479
Adjudication
Decision by judgment 42.216 10,6
Decision by court decision
(without oral hearing)
24.293 6,1
Other termination
Withdrawal 157.203 39,4
Court settlement 42.133 10,5
Accepted acknowledgment 60.379 15,1
Mutual declaration that there is
no need to adjudicate
39.131 9,8
Germany
Source: Statistisches Bundesamt, Fachserie 10, 2012
19.3.2015Petra Hietanen-Kunwald

12. Austria (invalidity pension)
Figures (2011) Percentage (2011)
Total number of cases 25.010
Adjudication
Judgment 3943 15,8
Other termination
Withdrawal 16.517 66
Court settlement 4.536 18,1
Source: Bundesarbeiterkammer, Wirtschafts- und Sozialstatistisches
Taschenbuch 2013
19.3.2015Petra Hietanen-Kunwald

13. Pre-court procedures
 Nature
 Administrative
 Written procedure
 Panel
 Function
 Internal review system
 Filtering
19.3.2015Petra Hietanen-Kunwald

14. Issues
 Profile of the Appeal Board?
 Strengthening the role of the single judge?
 Involvement of the beneficiary?
 Expert evidence?
 Regulation of the procedure?
19.3.2015Petra Hietanen-Kunwald