The Superior Court of Justice of Catalonia (TSJ) has endorsed in ruling 5842/2025 that a mother of two daughters who was collecting the Minimum Living Income (IMV) has to return more than 20,000 euros of improper charges. The National Social Security Institute (INSS) detected that the benefit was recognized with incomplete data about their family situation, specifically what had to do with the number of people who made up the cohabitation unit.
In 2020, a woman requested the IMV stating that he was only living with his two daughters, so Social Security granted him this benefit with a monthly income of 600 euros. But when a data cross-check was carried out, the INSS found that the beneficiary’s mother, the girls’ grandmother, was living in the same house, who had her own income that, if added to the rest of the family unit (including the daughters’ alimony), exceeded the limits of the IMV.
By including this person in the cohabitation unit, the required economic thresholds were exceeded so that the requirements that had determined the collection of the aid were no longer met.
The administration then began a process to revoke the benefit and claim the amounts paid.
The Social Court partially agreed with the plaintiff.
In the first instance, the Social Court agreed, albeit partially, with the plaintiff, recognizing that she was not entitled to the IMV, but ruled out forcing her to return what she had already received. The INSS appealed this decision and in the end the regional court ruled in favor.
The TSJ considers that the granting of aid was made based on a statement that, as the ruling says, was “at the very least inaccurate,” by not including the mother within the cohabitation unit. This element is important for the ruling because it prevents the application of the European doctrine that, in some cases, exempts the return of undue benefits when the error is attributable exclusively to the administration.
The magistrates have rejected the argument that the home was separated into different spaces, which is what the defendant had initially alleged. The Court considered that although the house had two floors with a certain autonomy, it was a single home for legal purposes with common supplies and shared access, so all the occupants were the same family unit.
Justice concludes that the vulnerability requirements were not met
The court concludes that the economic vulnerability requirements required to be able to collect the IMV were not met and that the responsibility for the improper recognition cannot be attributed solely to the INSS.
Social Security had initially set that the refund was 6,546 euros for the amounts received in 2021, although it later raised those figures to 20,125 euros for the period between June 2020 and July 2023.
In this way, it revokes the previous ruling and confirms the Social Security resolution, although it is not final and could be appealed to the Supreme Court.