The Supreme Court has established that a beneficiary does not have to repay the amounts received from a subsidy if the grant was due to an error by the Administration and not due to fraud by the citizen.
The Supreme Court has set a key criterion for beneficiaries of benefits from the State Public Employment Service (SEPE): if the Administration grants a subsidy due to its own error, the citizen is not obliged to repay the money already received, as long as they have not concealed information or acted in bad faith. The ruling, analysed by labour lawyer Míriam Ruiz Acosta, affects cases such as that of a woman who received 12,000 euros from the subsidy for those over 52 years old, which, according to SEPE, she was not entitled to.
When is repayment not required?
The key lies in who made the error. Lawyer Míriam Ruiz Acosta, from the Compromiso Legal firm, explains that the Supreme Court distinguishes between two situations. If the beneficiary correctly provided all the required information and the Administration, after reviewing it, acknowledged the aid, but then detects that the requirements were not met, SEPE can suspend or terminate the subsidy, but cannot demand the repayment of what has already been received.
The reasoning of the high court is that, in these cases, the fault lies with the Administration, not the citizen. Therefore, demanding repayment would be disproportionate. The ruling applies to the subsidy for those over 52 years old, a benefit that allows contributions towards future pensions while protecting the unemployed until retirement.
Fraud or concealment changes everything
The protection is not absolute. The lawyer warns that the Supreme Court's criterion only applies if the beneficiary has not concealed information or acted fraudulently. For example, if a person receives an inheritance and does not inform SEPE of this change in income, the error is no longer attributable to the Administration, because the citizen had the obligation to inform.
In that case, SEPE could indeed demand the repayment of what was improperly received. The ruling, therefore, protects those who act in good faith and trust in the Administration's resolution, but does not protect those who conceal relevant data to obtain a benefit to which they are not entitled.
What to do if SEPE demands repayment
If a beneficiary receives a letter from SEPE demanding the repayment of a subsidy received due to an error by the Administration, the lawyer recommends appealing based on this Supreme Court ruling. The affected party must demonstrate that they fulfilled their obligation to provide truthful information and that it was the Administration that granted the aid without detecting the error.
The deadline for appealing is usually one month from the notification, so it is advisable to act quickly. Furthermore, the ruling sets a precedent that could apply to other SEPE subsidies, such as those for those over 52 years old or ordinary unemployment, as long as the same conditions are met.
For the interested reader, the practical message is clear: if you have received a subsidy that SEPE granted you and then demands repayment for an error that was not yours, you are not obliged to pay. However, keep all documentation that proves you provided the correct information at the time.
You may also like
