Degree of damage consequences

The degree of damage consequences (GdS) is a legal term from social compensation law , which has replaced the concept of reduced earning capacity (MdE) in Section 30 (1) BVG since December 21, 2007.

Motives of the legislature

The change in the term is intended to express more clearly than before that there must be a causal relationship between the damage to be compensated and the damage to health to be compensated . The previous term MdE had also given the impression that the assessment of the health damage was based solely or predominantly on its effects on the ability to work or the employment prospects of the injured party. The legislature has emphasized that the new version should not be associated with a worse position. Because of this, there should also not be any new assessment proceedings.

The change was initially only made in the Federal Pension Act; for the area of statutory accident insurance, where the MdE is also used to measure the compensation after the occurrence of an insured event, it should take place in a later legislative process.

Dimensioning of the GdS

According to Section 30 (1) BVG, the degree of damage consequences is to be set in degrees of ten from 10 to 100. Minor health disorders that last less than six months are not taken into account. Children are equal to adults.

Since January 1, 2009, the assessment has been based on the "Health Care Principles" in the annex to Section 2 of the Health Care Ordinance (VersMedV; formerly according to the guidelines for medical expert work in social compensation law and according to the law on severely disabled persons , AHP).

The case law had given the “clues” the status of an “anticipated expert opinion”. As a result, an appraisal based on it could not be attacked with an expert opinion in individual cases. One could therefore usually only proceed against an assessment by complaining that the AHP could no longer be reconciled with the current state of medical science, that an outdated version was used as the basis for the assessment. It can be assumed that this jurisprudence will also continue to apply to the “principles of medical care”.

Differentiation from the degree of disability

The degree of the consequences of damage must be differentiated from the degree of disability (GdB), which is determined by the pension offices according to § 152 SGB IX according to the disability law. If a GdB of more than 50 has been determined, this can be entered as a severe disability in a severely handicapped ID card . In contrast to the GdS, the GdB is not causally related to a specific damage , but rather it refers to impairments in all areas of life and is intended to "finally" open up access to related compensation. The Federal Social Court has, however, expressed that despite these differences in detail, the degree of disability and the degree of the consequences of damage should generally be the same in the future.

Web links

VdK: degree of disability (GdB) and degree of damage consequences (GdS). Retrieved May 26, 2016 (undated).

literature

Stefanie Vogl: Social pension law: "Degree of damage consequences" now determines the pension entitlement. "Health care principles" replace "clues" - even when determining a degree of disability . In: SozSich . 2009, p. 353 .
Manfred Benz: The determination of the total GdB (severely handicapped rights) and the total MdE (statutory accident insurance) . In: The social justice . 2009, p. 353 .

Individual evidence

↑ Act amending the Federal Pension Act and other provisions of social compensation law. (PDF) (No longer available online.) In: BGBl. I 2904. December 20, 2007, formerly in the original ; Retrieved September 20, 2010 . ( Page no longer available , search in web archives ) Info: The link was automatically marked as defective. Please check the link according to the instructions and then remove this notice.@1@ 2Template: Toter Link / www.bgbl.de
^ Federal Council: BR-Drs. 541/07. (PDF; 651 kB) August 10, 2007, p. 2, 80 , accessed on September 20, 2010 .
^ Federal Council: BR-Drs. 541/07. (PDF; 651 kB) August 10, 2007, p. 80 , accessed on September 20, 2010 .
^ Federal Council: BR-Drs. 541/07. (PDF; 651 kB) August 10, 2007, p. 80 , accessed on September 20, 2010 .
^ Federal Council: BR-Drs. 541/07. (PDF; 651 kB) August 10, 2007, p. 2 , accessed on September 20, 2010 .
↑ BSG: Judgment - B 9 SB 3/02 R. September 18, 2003, accessed on September 20, 2010 : “According to the case law, these are anticipated expert reports whose relevance in specific administrative and court proceedings results on the one hand that the application of the law in accordance with the general principle of equality is only guaranteed if the various disabilities are assessed according to the same criteria; on the other hand, according to the experience of the BSG, the AHP 1996 (as well as its predecessors) represent a suitable assessment structure based on empirical values of the care administration and knowledge of medical science for the assessment of the GdB (see BSGE 72, 285, 286 f = SozR 3- 3870 § 4 No. 6; BSGE 75, 176, 177 f = SozR 3-3870 § 3 No. 5; BVerfG SozR 3-3870 § 3 No. 6). In this respect, the AHP have a similar effect to the norm. Their general correctness can therefore not be refuted by individual reports. However, they are to be checked - like subordinate legal norms - for their compatibility with the law and the constitution, for taking into account the current state of knowledge of social medical science and for gaps in special cases that have to be assessed separately due to the individual circumstances. "
↑ VdK: Degree of disability (GdB) and degree of damage consequences (GdS). (No longer available online.) Archived from the original on August 16, 2011 ; Retrieved September 20, 2010 (undated). Info: The archive link was inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot / www.vdk.de
↑ For the distinction between the final principle and the causal principle in social law cf. only Gerhard Igl and Felix Welti: social law . 8th edition. Werner Verlag, Neuwied 2007, ISBN 978-3-8041-4196-4 (§ 2 Rn. 4).
^ Gerhard Igl and Felix Welti: Social law . 8th edition. Werner Verlag, Neuwied 2007, ISBN 978-3-8041-4196-4 (§ 69 Rn. 14 with reference to BSGE 89, 199).

[1] Act amending the Federal Pension Act and other provisions of social compensation law. (PDF) (No longer available online.) In: BGBl. I 2904. December 20, 2007, formerly in the original ; Retrieved September 20, 2010 . ( Page no longer available , search in web archives ) Info: The link was automatically marked as defective. Please check the link according to the instructions and then remove this notice.@1@ 2Template: Toter Link / www.bgbl.de

[2] Federal Council: BR-Drs. 541/07. (PDF; 651 kB) August 10, 2007, p. 2, 80 , accessed on September 20, 2010 .

[3] Federal Council: BR-Drs. 541/07. (PDF; 651 kB) August 10, 2007, p. 80 , accessed on September 20, 2010 .

[4] Federal Council: BR-Drs. 541/07. (PDF; 651 kB) August 10, 2007, p. 80 , accessed on September 20, 2010 .

[5] Federal Council: BR-Drs. 541/07. (PDF; 651 kB) August 10, 2007, p. 2 , accessed on September 20, 2010 .

[6] BSG: Judgment - B 9 SB 3/02 R. September 18, 2003, accessed on September 20, 2010 : “According to the case law, these are anticipated expert reports whose relevance in specific administrative and court proceedings results on the one hand that the application of the law in accordance with the general principle of equality is only guaranteed if the various disabilities are assessed according to the same criteria; on the other hand, according to the experience of the BSG, the AHP 1996 (as well as its predecessors) represent a suitable assessment structure based on empirical values of the care administration and knowledge of medical science for the assessment of the GdB (see BSGE 72, 285, 286 f = SozR 3- 3870 § 4 No. 6; BSGE 75, 176, 177 f = SozR 3-3870 § 3 No. 5; BVerfG SozR 3-3870 § 3 No. 6). In this respect, the AHP have a similar effect to the norm. Their general correctness can therefore not be refuted by individual reports. However, they are to be checked - like subordinate legal norms - for their compatibility with the law and the constitution, for taking into account the current state of knowledge of social medical science and for gaps in special cases that have to be assessed separately due to the individual circumstances. "

[7] VdK: Degree of disability (GdB) and degree of damage consequences (GdS). (No longer available online.) Archived from the original on August 16, 2011 ; Retrieved September 20, 2010 (undated). Info: The archive link was inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot / www.vdk.de

[8] For the distinction between the final principle and the causal principle in social law cf. only Gerhard Igl and Felix Welti: social law . 8th edition. Werner Verlag, Neuwied 2007, ISBN 978-3-8041-4196-4 (§ 2 Rn. 4).

[9] Gerhard Igl and Felix Welti: Social law . 8th edition. Werner Verlag, Neuwied 2007, ISBN 978-3-8041-4196-4 (§ 69 Rn. 14 with reference to BSGE 89, 199).