Image: dekazigzag / Shutterstock.com
A young woman from Hamburg wanted to launch her career and become a cosmetologist. The path to that goal led through a private school—and that’s exactly what became the sticking point in the end. The training program cost 400 euros in tuition each month. The woman was already receiving several forms of financial aid: student BAföG, an educational loan of 300 euros per month, and money from a part-time job at a beauty salon. Since that still wasn’t enough, she also received a basic income allowance. But the state wouldn’t help with the tuition fees. As the Merkur reports, the woman filed a lawsuit—and has now suffered a clear defeat at the Federal Social Court.
A lot of support—but not for everything
This case illustrates how quickly a student’s finances can spiral out of control when multiple expenses pile up at once. The plaintiff wasn’t simply broke. She was already receiving financial aid for her education, along with a loan and income from her own work. Yet, by the end of the month, she apparently had too little left over. That’s why the Jobcenter stepped in with a living allowance.
The dispute, however, centered on a very specific question: Does the Jobcenter have to include tuition fees for a private educational institution in its calculations? The woman said yes. Without that school, she would not have been able to pursue her desired career path. The Jobcenter said no—and stood by its decision.
First success, then a clear rejection
At first, things went somewhat well for the plaintiff in the Hamburg Social Court. The court ruled that she was entitled to higher benefits for a few months. However, the reason was not the school tuition, but an incorrect calculation of other benefits. So this was only a partial success.
The central issue remained unresolved: Can the 400 euros per month for the private school be deducted from the imputed income in any way? Ultimately, it was up to the Federal Social Court to decide exactly that. And there, the answer was clear-cut.
The court draws a clear distinction
The judges made it clear: Tuition fees paid may not be deducted from either BAföG or income from a part-time job. In other words, they do not reduce the eligible amount. The underlying principle is simple, but bitter for those affected. Student aid is paid as a lump sum. It is therefore intended to cover living expenses and education in general, without taking each individual expense into account separately.
The court also did not classify school tuition as an essential expense. It is precisely this point that makes the ruling politically and socially controversial. In essence, the court is saying that those who choose to send their children to a private school are making a personal financial decision. And this decision does not need to be offset by additional social benefits.
Freedom to choose a profession—but no entitlement to funding
The court was particularly clear in its reasoning. While it is true that, because of the tuition fees, the woman ultimately had less disposable income than someone attending a free school, the state is not required to compensate for this spending choice she made herself. Nor did the judges find any violation of the freedom of occupation or the principle of equality.
This is legally consistent, but socially unsettling. On paper, there is freedom of choice in one’s profession. In reality, it often comes down to one’s financial means. Those who cannot afford private education sometimes have only a limited version of this freedom. That is precisely what makes the decision so delicate: it is clear, strict, and likely legally sound—but it ruthlessly reveals that not every educational path is actually open to everyone.
Sources: merkur.de
Are you affected by the Supreme Court’s new ruling? Get legal support and book a consultation now!
to the lawyerAt a fixed price of 169 EURO (gross)
