Application for interim relief at the Sozialgericht

No, and this is the most important relief provided by the provision. § 86b Abs. 3 SGG expressly states: “The applications under subsections 1 and 2 are admissible even before an action is lodged.” You therefore need neither to wait for the objection proceedings nor to lodge a legal action beforehand – which is precisely what matters in an acute situation, since both take months. Nonetheless, you should lodge the Widerspruch against the Bescheid in parallel: the application for interim relief does not suspend the one-month deadline, and if it expires, the Bescheid becomes final while your interim relief proceedings are still pending. The application for interim relief provides provisional security; the main proceedings decide finally – you need both.

This cannot reliably be stated in days, and any source that does so goes beyond what the law provides: § 86b SGG contains no deadline within which the court would have to decide. How quickly it goes depends on the court, on the urgency of your case and, above all, on how complete your application is – if further questions have to be asked first, weeks go by. In particularly pressing cases, courts decide very quickly; in others, it takes longer; you should not rely on this. The practical advice is therefore: submit the application as completely as possible and make parallel arrangements to bridge the next few days – talking to the landlord, enquiring at the Sozialamt, social advice services.

This depends on whether something is being taken away from you or whether you want to obtain something. If an ongoing benefit is being withdrawn or you are required to make a repayment, subsection 1 is the route: the court can order or restore the suspensive effect, so that the Bescheid is not enforced for the time being. If, on the other hand, you want to obtain something you do not yet have – a refused treatment, a medical aid, a benefit sought for the first time –, subsection 2 applies: the interim order. If you are unsure, that is not a problem: describe the facts of the case and apply for interim legal protection; the court is not bound by your description and will classify the application correctly itself.

Two things, and both must hold up. First, the entitlement: that you are entitled to the benefit on the balance of probabilities – you do not have to prove it, but you must make it credible. Second, the urgency, and this is the part on which most applications fail. § 86b Abs. 2 SGG requires that the realisation of a right would be “frustrated or substantially impeded”, or that an arrangement “appears necessary to avert substantial disadvantages”. Do not write, therefore, “I have no money”, but what happens and when: which amount is due on which date, what is in the account, what termination or disconnection has been threatened. Bank statements, payment reminders and medical certificates are worth more here than any statement of reasons.

Nothing. The interim relief proceedings are also a procedure before the Sozialgericht and are therefore, under § 183 SGG, free of charge for “insured persons, benefit recipients … persons with disabilities” – without a court fee, without an advance payment. And even if the application is refused, under § 193 Abs. 4 SGG you do not bear the authority’s costs: its expenses are expressly “not recoverable”. There is therefore no financial risk in this situation that would argue against the application – and this is important to know, because the fear of costs paralyses people precisely when they have no money anyway. You do not need a lawyer; a Sozialverband or a trade union can represent you, and if you do want a lawyer, you can apply for Prozesskostenhilfe (legal aid for court proceedings).

Wherever a delay would lead to harm that can no longer be remedied later. Typical cases are: Grundsicherungsgeld (basic income support benefit for jobseekers) that has been stopped or reduced, or social assistance, where rent and subsistence are no longer covered; the refusal of urgent treatment or of a medical aid by the health insurance fund (Krankenkasse); the withdrawal or reduction of long-term care benefits, where this means care can no longer be ensured; and repayment demands combined with a set-off that push your ongoing needs below the minimum subsistence level. By contrast, the mere wish for faster processing is not a case for the application for interim relief – for that, once the waiting periods have expired, there is the action for failure to act. A word on the name, because it has changed: since the reform of July 2026, the benefit for persons capable of work is called, under § 19 Abs. 1 SGB II (Book Two of the Social Code), Grundsicherungsgeld (formerly Bürgergeld). This changes nothing for your proceedings – official notices issued before then remain open to challenge, and for the deadlines, the date of notification continues to count.

The court decides by means of an order and makes a provisional arrangement – for example, that the benefit is to continue being paid until the decision in the main proceedings. Two things follow from this. First: the arrangement applies only provisionally. You must continue to pursue the main proceedings – Widerspruch, and if necessary a legal action – otherwise its basis falls away. Second: because it is a provisional benefit, it can in principle be reclaimed if the outcome of the main proceedings is negative for you. This is no reason to refrain from the application – a secure home and medicines now outweigh that –, but you should know this and not be surprised. Ask an advice centre how this looks in your case.

That is not the end of the road. Against the refusing order, a complaint (Beschwerde) to the Landessozialgericht may be considered; the relevant deadline and the competent court are stated in the Rechtsbehelfsbelehrung of the order, which you should therefore read immediately. At the same time, check why it was refused: if it failed on urgency, a new application can be made if the situation becomes more acute and you can prove this – for example, with a termination now actually issued. If it failed on the entitlement, the work in the main proceedings matters more, where the court investigates of its own motion and obtains expert opinions. Regardless of this: the refusal costs you nothing.