Definition and significance of the duty to provide information about social benefits
Die Duty to provide information about social benefits is a fundamental principle in German social law. It obliges social benefit providers to comprehensively, clearly, and promptly inform applicants as well as current beneficiaries about their rights, obligations, and options in connection with social benefits. The aim of this duty is to ensure lawful, fair, and transparent granting of benefits, and to enable applicants and beneficiaries to exercise all relevant social law entitlements.
Legal basis
Social Code (SGB)
The duty to provide information is regulated in particular in the First Book of the Social Code (SGB I). The relevant provisions are:
- Section 13 SGB I: Information
- Section 14 SGB I: Counseling
- Section 15 SGB I: Disclosure
- Additional provisions in the respective special laws (for example SGB II, SGB XII)
According to Section 13 SGB I, social benefit providers are obliged to “inform the entitled persons about their rights and obligations in connection with social benefits,” including the benefits available, the requirements for entitlement, and the applicable procedural rules.
Scope of the duty to provide information
Substantive obligations
The duty to provide information includes at least the following aspects:
- Information about possible social benefits: What benefits are available? Are there options to choose from (e.g., between benefits in kind and cash benefits)?
- Requirements for granting benefits: What requirements must be met (income and asset checks, duties to cooperate, etc.)?
- Procedures and deadlines: How does the application process work? What deadlines must be observed?
- Consequences of omissions and failures: What happens if required information is not provided or documents are not submitted?
Limits of the duty to provide information
The duty to provide information is not unlimited. It exists in particular to the extent that the social benefit provider is or should be aware of circumstances indicating a possible entitlement to benefits. However, there is no general obligation to provide comprehensive consulting. A breach of the duty to provide information can, however, lead to official liability claims or a social law restoration claim in favor of the affected persons.
Parties involved and recipients of the duty to provide information
Recipients of the duty to provide information are in principle all persons who apply for or receive social benefits. This includes in particular:
- Applicants
- Beneficiaries
- Third parties with a duty to cooperate (e.g., persons obliged to pay maintenance)
- In individual cases, also other affected persons whose rights are impacted by the social law procedure
The duty to provide information applies to both natural and legal persons.
Types and methods of providing information
Information may be provided verbally, in writing, or electronically. In practice, the following forms are frequently used:
- Written information sheets and notes in application forms
- Personal advisory interviews
- Telephone responses
- Electronic information via online portals
The principle of comprehensibility requires that the information must be delivered in a way that the person concerned can understand. If necessary, foreign language or barrier-free formats must be offered.
Consequences of breaching the duty to provide information
Restoration claim (Section 44 SGB X)
If the duty to provide information is breached and the affected person suffers a disadvantage as a result (for example, loss or reduction of a benefit entitlement), a so-called social law restoration claim may arise. In such case, the benefit provider is obliged to restore the situation that would exist if proper information had been provided.
Official liability and compensation
In cases of intentional or grossly negligent breaches of duty, the public authority may be liable pursuant to Section 839 German Civil Code (BGB) in conjunction with Article 34 Basic Law (GG). However, specific requirements must be met for this.
Reversal and subsequent granting of benefits
Under certain circumstances, the retroactive granting or payment of benefits is possible, for example when a claim to benefits was not asserted in time due to incorrect information.
Distinction: duty to provide information vs. duty to advise vs. duty to provide disclosure
Die Duty to provide information is closely related to the duty to advise (Section 14 SGB I) and the duty to provide disclosure (Section 15 SGB I), but differs particularly in terms of the authority’s initiative and the scope of content:
- Duty to provide information: Independent obligation of the authority to inform actively and on its own initiative as soon as there are indications of a need for advice.
- duty to advise: Encompasses comprehensive or individual information, generally upon specific request or in the case of apparent information deficits.
- duty to provide disclosure: Limited to answering specific inquiries about facts and legal issues.
Practical examples
Failure to provide information about additional entitlements
If, for example, an applicant for unemployment benefit II is not informed that there is an additional entitlement to supplementary needs or certain one-off payments, this may constitute a breach of the duty to provide information.
Failure to meet formal requirements and deadlines
If a health insurance fund does not proactively inform that a claim to maternity benefit can only be asserted within certain deadlines, this may constitute a breach of duty.
Significance for administrative proceedings
The duty to provide information is a key component of a fair and lawful administrative procedure in social law. Its systematic observance plays a significant role in ensuring that claims are not lost due to ignorance and in strengthening public trust in social administration.
Literature and case law
The jurisprudence of the Federal Social Court and numerous regional social courts has specified the requirements for the duty to provide information. What is decisive is always the individual case and the question of what information and indications were available in the concrete administrative action. Literature and commentary on SGB I offer in-depth discussion of these matters.
See also:
Frequently asked questions
Who is legally obliged to provide information about social benefits?
As a rule, the providers of the respective social benefits are legally obliged to provide information about social benefits. This obligation arises in particular from Section 13 of the Social Code Book I (SGB I). According to this, social benefit providers must comprehensively inform those affected about their rights and obligations in connection with an application and during ongoing proceedings. This includes especially information about existing entitlements, necessary duties to cooperate, deadlines, required documents, as well as legal remedies. In addition, benefit providers are required to clarify clearly incomplete or ambiguous applications and to provide targeted information to beneficiaries when there are indications of further possible entitlements. The duty to provide information mainly concerns authorities such as health and nursing care insurance funds, the Federal Employment Agency, pension insurance providers, job centers, and other bodies responsible for granting or mediating social benefits.
What are the legal consequences of a breach of the duty to provide information?
A violation of the duty to provide information can have far-reaching legal consequences. If a benefit provider fails to fulfill its information obligation completely or at all and the citizen suffers a disadvantage as a result, such as submitting an application too late or incompletely, this can result in a so-called social law restoration claim. This claim is specifically recognized in social law and requires that the original state be restored that would have existed if the duty to provide information had been properly fulfilled. In practice, this means, for example, that benefits can be granted retroactively, or a disadvantage must be compensated, provided that the affected party is demonstrably not at fault. In addition, incorrect decisions can be annulled or amended. In severe cases, an official liability lawsuit against the benefit provider may be possible if the affected person has suffered damage.
What information must be provided at a minimum when informing about social benefits?
Information about social benefits must be comprehensive, understandable, and individualized, and must at least cover the following: First, the existing entitlements to social benefits, taking into account the applicant’s individual life circumstances and needs. Second, the prerequisites for entitlement, that is, particularly facts and evidence that must be present or submitted. Third, duties to cooperate must be explained – these include, for example, the obligation to report changes in income or asset situation, as well as immediate notification of changes in family situation. Fourth, there must be information about deadlines and their significance, in particular application, evidence, or objection deadlines. Finally, legal information about the possibilities of lodging an objection or challenging decisions must also be included. This information must be provided in writing, orally, or electronically, with proof of information being decisive in case of a dispute.
When does the duty of a social benefit provider to provide information begin and end?
The duty to provide information generally begins with the very first contact between the citizen and the social benefit provider – this can be a consultation, a formal application, or even a mere inquiry. The obligation persists throughout the entire administrative process and does not end until the final and legally binding conclusion of the proceedings, such as the final approval or rejection of the benefit, the conclusion of an appeal process, or the entry into legal force of a notice. As long as there are open questions regarding entitlements or if the applicant’s personal circumstances change, the social benefit provider is required to continue to provide information both proactively and reactively. This duty is revived when new relevant events become known or contact with the benefit provider is re-established.
What are the differences between the duties to disclose, advise, and inform in social law?
The duties to inform, disclose, and advise are often confused, but are legally distinct. The duty to inform obliges the social benefit provider to independently and proactively communicate essential information as soon as there are indications of an entitlement, without the need for a specific inquiry. The duty to disclose applies when the citizen poses a specific question regarding a certain topic or circumstance; the provider must then give honest, comprehensive, and concrete information. The duty to advise goes further and becomes relevant especially in complex situations: the provider is required to advise the benefit recipient individually, to check which specific benefits may be claimed, and, if necessary, to point out additional application options. All three obligations are regulated in SGB I (Sections 13–15 SGB I), but differ in scope and the trigger for providing information.
Must the information also be communicated in language understandable to laypersons?
Yes, the legal duty to inform expressly requires that information must not only be correct but also explained in a way that is understandable to the average layperson (Section 13 SGB I). This means that legal terminology should be avoided or explained in simple terms, and information should be presented so that it is understandable even without legal expertise. Where necessary, foreign-language information or barrier-free access must also be provided, such as translations, plain language, or offers for people with disabilities. If this requirement is not met and a disadvantage results, this too can trigger a social law restoration claim.
How can an affected citizen prove that they were not adequately informed?
The burden of proof for inadequate information initially lies with the affected citizen, but courts in social law regularly evaluate the burden of proof considering all circumstances. Particularly relevant are the course of the administrative proceedings, notices received, counseling records, documentation of meetings or correspondence with the authority. Statutory declarations, witness statements, or copies of information material can also be helpful. In cases of doubt, however, the social benefit provider often has to prove that it has demonstrably and properly fulfilled its duty to inform. If the authority fails to meet this secondary burden of explanation and credible doubts remain regarding adequate information, this may be judged in favor of the citizen.
