What was decided in the test case
The Inclusion Allowance Act says little about the death of a beneficiary: the right ceases on the day of death. That leaves unanswered the two questions that actually arise in practice — what happens to amounts that had fallen due but were not paid, and whether proceedings that were under way can continue. The second question was answered by the Administrative Court in Zagreb in a judgment given in a test case (case no. Us I-3006/2025, judgment of 23 January 2026). The Ministry withdrew its appeal against that judgment.
What was in dispute
The applicant filed a complete application, no decision was issued within the statutory time limit, and the applicant died in the meantime. The Institute discontinued the proceedings, relying on the general administrative procedure rule on the death of a party, and the Ministry dismissed the heir’s appeal — reasoning that rights in the social welfare system are personal and cannot be inherited, and that the deceased had never become a beneficiary.
The court’s key findings
- An application for the inclusion allowance, although it concerns a right of a strictly personal nature, also contains an unrealised pecuniary claim, so the proceedings may continue with the heirs of the deceased party.
- The non-transferability of social welfare rights concerns the underlying right as such, not the individual monthly amounts belonging to the period from the application to the death.
- Because the right is granted retroactively, from the day the complete application was filed, a party who meets the conditions legitimately expects to be granted the amounts for that period as well.
- Discontinuing the proceedings after the statutory time limit had passed would let the public body derive a benefit from its own failure to comply with the law, leaving the heir unable to have it examined at all whether the deceased met the conditions.
- The fact that the deceased did not appeal against the authority’s silence does not harm the heir — the authority’s duty to decide within the time limit does not depend on the party using remedies.
- Unlike the earlier one, the Social Welfare Act in force no longer contains a provision expressly requiring discontinuation where a party dies before the decision becomes enforceable; the absence of that provision supports continuing the proceedings.
- The rules on non-transferability and on inheriting amounts that had fallen due but were unpaid are in substance the same in social welfare as in pension insurance, so the case law developed there can be applied here too.
What this means in practice
The decisions discontinuing the proceedings were quashed and the proceedings continue with the heir. No separate decision is issued on the continuation — the authority is simply required to carry on. As the case was conducted as a test case, the same question in a series of identical cases is to be resolved the same way.
In addition, the Social Welfare Act expressly provides that monetary benefits that had fallen due and were not paid before the beneficiary’s death are inherited by their heirs under the inheritance legislation. Heirship is proved by the decision on inheritance, which is therefore the document to be submitted in the procedure.
What is practically available to the heirs
- Request that the proceedings continue — the Institute has a dedicated form for heirs of applicants who died before a final decision.
- Keep the documentation — the application with the confirmation of receipt, all decisions and proof of the date of service are decisive.
- Watch the time limits — they run independently of the probate proceedings; fifteen or thirty days pass while the heirs are still making enquiries.
- Submit the decision on inheritance, or register the claim in the probate proceedings if they are not yet concluded.
- Do not give up because of an oral statement — being told that “the right ceases on death” is correct as to the right for the future, but it does not answer the question of the amounts already due.
If the beneficiary died before payment or during the procedure, contact us — we will check what stage the case is at, request that the proceedings continue, and represent the heirs before the Institute, the Ministry and the administrative court.