A Court of Alicante has ruled on a case involving a Russian national and Social Security payments, addressing possible fraud in the collection of the minimum vital income. The decision was made public this week by the Supreme Court of Justice. During the procedure the individual received assistance, yet investigations showed more than 100,000 euros of personal funds. The ruling comes from Alicante’s Contested-Administrative Court number three, presided by magistrate José María Magán.
The court’s reasoning presents a mixed picture. On one hand, it accepts the applicant’s claim by recognizing a verified lack of sufficient economic income, establishing that the person faced real financial need. On the other hand, the same lack of income prompts concerns about potential fraud in the payment of the allowance. As a result, the court contemplates reviewing the benefit ex officio and informs the Social Security accordingly. The decision is not final, and there is an appeal before the Supreme Court of Justice (TSJ).
In this context, the matter touches on the obligations tied to the Permanent Residence Card held by a relative of an EU citizen while staying in Spain, including proofs of sufficient funds for themselves and their family to avoid becoming an undue burden on social assistance and universal healthcare in the country.
The appellant demonstrated ownership of several bank accounts: a current account with a balance around 8,000 euros in a Russian bank, another with 20,000 euros in Austria, and over 5,000 euros in a Spanish account. Additional documents showed the applicant carried 65,070 euros in cash upon arrival in Spain. These financial details were used to argue that the applicant possessed sufficient income to meet the needs that the complaint sought to address. From June 1, 2020, the individual was receiving the minimum vital income in the amount of 460.93 euros per month.
The court also weighed the overall financial situation against the possibility of an illegality associated with the claim. While the resources were recognized as sufficient to support a favorable decision on the residence card, the judge emphasized that it would be unacceptable to overlook any unlawful aspect arising from the law or from the conduct of the claimant. The magistrate highlighted the inconsistency of someone declaring substantial resources while simultaneously benefiting from public funds intended to assist those in economic hardship. When funds are deposited across multiple banks, the notion of genuine economic fragility becomes harder to sustain.
The decision recalls that the minimum living income is intended as a safeguard against poverty and social exclusion for individuals living alone or within a household unit who lack the basic resources to meet daily needs. It questions the credibility of someone asserting more than 70,000 euros in assets yet receiving public support in cash, advocating that the file should be thoroughly reviewed by the competent authorities. The TSJ’s position underscores the careful balance between providing essential social support and preventing improper use of public funds, with the ultimate aim of preserving the integrity of the social welfare system. Attribution: TSJ press release and court documents published in recent court sessions.