A court annuls the withdrawal of the subsidy for those over 52 from a man, because SEPE cut the aid without giving him a prior hearing. The agency must refund the benefit and pay the amounts he stopped receiving.
According to que.es, a court has annulled the withdrawal of the subsidy for those over 52 years old from a man because the SEPE took it away without giving him a hearing. The agency must refund the benefit, resume its payment, and pay the amounts the beneficiary stopped receiving.
The essence of the matter remains unresolved. The court focuses on the procedure: Justice considers that withdrawing aid without first hearing the beneficiary leaves them without the opportunity to defend themselves, even though the trips abroad that motivated the decision did occur.
The Social Chamber of the High Court of Justice of the Basque Country confirms the annulment already declared by the Vitoria-Gasteiz Court of First Instance. The subsidy was recognised from 23 September 2020 to 12 December 2027.
On 30 April 2025, SEPE decided to withdraw the benefit with retroactive effect from 9 April 2022. The notification arrived on 8 May 2025. The beneficiary filed a claim, the agency rejected the claim, and the case ended up in court.
The trigger was several stays outside Spain between April 2022 and January 2025, detected from data from the Central Unit of Immigration Networks and Document Fraud. SEPE considered that the absences exceeded 30 days per calendar year that allow continued receipt of the benefit.
The ruling states that SEPE did not open the hearing process, the prior step in which the Administration explains what it intends to do and gives the interested party the opportunity to present allegations and documents. Furthermore, according to the Chamber, it did not specify the facts until responding to the subsequent claim. The court rejected the need to specify the exact days of stay abroad, as those periods were already included in the proven facts. The judges remind that the Law 39/2015, which regulates the functioning of the Administration, imposes minimum guarantees that cannot be bypassed, even though unemployment regulations have their own procedures.
Anyone in a similar situation should first review the notification to check if they were given a period to argue before the aid was terminated. If they were not, they can submit a prior written claim to the SEPE, with documents proving their situation, and keep the notifications and proof of sending. If the claim is rejected, the matter can be taken to the social jurisdiction, with the support of a social graduate or a labour lawyer.
The ruling does not absolve the facts. SEPE can open a new procedure to withdraw the subsidy, as long as it gives the beneficiary a hearing and acts within the limitation periods. The resolution is not final, so there is a possibility of appeal to the Supreme Court. Anyone leaving the country must inform SEPE.
You may also like
