Supreme Administrative Court rules that temporary caregivers qualify for child education benefit regardless of adoption application.
300+ Benefit Only When Caregiver Applied for Child Adoption
The Social Insurance Institution (ZUS) denied the grandmother’s application for the 300+ benefit, arguing that under paragraph 4, section 1 of the regulation of the Council of Ministers of June 15, 2021, on the detailed conditions for implementing the government’s “Good Start” program, she was not entitled to apply for this benefit. Although the benefit is available to a child’s actual caregiver, the grandmother did not meet the definition of such a caregiver as defined in paragraph 2, point 3 of the regulation, which refers to a person actually caring for a child who has applied to the court for their adoption. The grandmother had not applied for her granddaughter’s adoption.
The ZUS president took a similar stance when the woman appealed. Her next step was to file a complaint with the Voivodeship Administrative Court in Lublin, to which the Ombudsman for Children Rights (RPD) joined the proceedings. This was also rejected because the court, in its ruling of October 10, 2023 (case no. II SA/Lu 524/23), did not find that ZUS had violated the law in refusing the benefit. Consequently, the RPD decided to file a cassation appeal with the NSA.
The Child’s Welfare is Paramount
The NSA recognized that the cassation appeal was justified and overturned the ruling of the WSA in Lublin. It reminded that the benefit from the “Good Start” program aims to partially cover the costs of maintaining a child related to the start of the school year and is directed to persons caring for a child and bearing these expenses. This objective is not fulfilled by differentiating children based on the criterion of the form of care established by the family court.
NSA emphasizes that the child’s welfare should be treated as a paramount value also when the person applying for the 300+ benefit does not meet the conditions to be recognized as the child’s actual caregiver under the provisions of the regulation, but at the same time exercises care over the child’s upbringing and development. Such a person should therefore have the right to effectively demand state assistance in providing care, including financial assistance.