SRG violates the principle of diversity of opinion with its contribution to the Covid Act
The Federal Supreme Court dismissed the SRG's appeal against the UBI's decision.
During the pandemic, state coronavirus aid was intended to protect companies quickly and unbureaucratically from the existential consequences of the closure orders. Today, many companies are once again coming under pressure because a considerable amount of this aid is being reclaimed. This comes as a surprise to many companies, as the funds were approved, paid out and already used for the intended purpose.
The reclaims hit many in an already difficult economic situation and can seriously jeopardise companies, the self-employed and cultural businesses. In addition, many decisions are open to legal challenge, for example due to unclear justifications or changing legal bases. It can therefore make sense to have recovery notices legally scrutinised and to lodge an objection in good time.
We review recovery notices for Bridging Aid I to IV, November and December Aid, Restart Aid and Restart Aid Plus as well as other coronavirus funding programmes. In particular, we assess the legal basis, the reasons for the decision and possible procedural errors.
If an objection is rejected, we examine the prospects of success of an action before the administrative court. We provide support in the judicial review of the reclaim notice, the legal assessment and representation in the administrative court proceedings.
The problem does not always begin with a reclaim notice. Conflicts often become apparent at an earlier stage, for example through queries from the authorisation office, consultation letters or information about possible reclaims.
The problem does not always begin with a reclaim notice. Conflicts often become apparent at an earlier stage, for example through queries from the authorisation office, consultation letters or information about possible reclaims.