Reduced pension during institutional residence also applies while on leave from the institution

An old-age pensioner had his pension reduced because he was residing in an institution. He was regularly granted short periods of leave and argued that his pension should not be reduced on the days he spent at home.

Under section 19-21 of the National Insurance Act, only a reduced old-age pension is payable “during a stay in an institution with free board and lodging”. The Supreme Court unanimously held that the decisive factor is whether the pensioner is admitted to the institution. Although the pensioner was regularly on leave, he remained admitted to the institution. The pension was therefore not to be recalculated on a day-by-day basis according to the number of days spent at home.

The Supreme Court based its reasoning on an interpretation of the statutory wording and emphasised that the wording must be construed in its linguistic context. The term “stay” was understood as referring to being admitted to an institution. This interpretation was also supported by the legislative history and preparatory works. The purpose of the legislation did not weigh heavily against the interpretation that followed from the wording and the other sources of law. As the case stood, it was not necessary to examine more closely the significance of the principle of legality in the field of social security law.

The judgment clarifies the interpretation of section 19-21 of the National Insurance Act.

Area of law: Social security law

Key paragraphs: 20, 21, 37, 55, 62

Justices: Bull, Østensen Berglund, Steinsvik, Lund and Horn.