Die Mitwirkungspflichten im SGB I. (German Edition)

Ebooks Download Free Books Die Mitwirkungspflichten Im Sgb I German Edition Fb2 B007qgykts

---

Both parties receive a binding decision on the status of the worker in the form of an official communication. If an employment relationship requiring the payment of social security contributions is ascertained, then there is an insurance requirement in all social security schemes.

Residence permit for the purpose of research - application

The inquiry procedure at the clearing house is not necessary if a health insurance company has already carried out or initiated a procedure to determine the status of the worker, for example, with respect to a decision on voluntary insurance, or if the status has already been checked by a pension insurance agency as part of an audit.

You must append to the application copies of all contracts which are relevant to the existing contractual relationship, for example, contract relating to the activity as a freelancer or commercial agent, fee-based contract, training contract. Also, you should attach any existing additional agreements, amendment agreements or supplemental agreements. In the following cases, without an application being required, a decision is made on the existence of a working relationship on the initiative of the collecting agency obligatory procedure to determine social security status:.

The procedure is also concluded with a binding decision in the form of an official communication.

The German original version of this text was drafted in close cooperation with the relevant departments. The Deutsche Rentenversicherung released the full description on Only the German text is legally binding. The Federal State does not assume any liability for the translated texts. In cases of doubt or if you have any questions or problems, please contact the relevant authorities directly. Responsible authority German association of pension insurance companies Deutschen Rentenversicherung Bund - Clearing house.

Prerequisite It is not clear whether the activity or employment must be insured in the German statutory pension insurance scheme. You are an employee, self-employed, an employer or contractor. It is not clear whether the activity or employment must be insured in the German statutory pension insurance scheme. David, what comes after the "standalone statement" headline?

Is it a blank form that someone has to fill out, or is there text in it? Phil, it's not an exemption. See David's first link or the one I gave. Snide comment is not appropriate.

That is obviously what the Asker is trying to do. He has done his homework, but he still doesn't know the best solution. My comment was not intended to be snide, and I apologise if anyone took it this way. All I intended was to challenge the asker, as a native English-speaker, to trust his or her intuition here.

I see the discussion now!

Verfahrensbeschreibungen

Although I'm having trouble editing the original question. To clarify, although the phrase is is the top portion of the letter, it is not the 'heading'.

The question was posted for a couple of reasons: Also, sometimes when it comes to legal provisions, the best translation s may not sound particularly 'natural' to the general public. You can't edit the original question. Maybe I can help with the German. Ekkehart Reinelt, Rechtsanwalt beim Bundesgerichtshof: Etwas anderes gilt nur, wenn der Adressat mit dem Zugang eines Schreibens rechnen musste.

Here's the relevant UK document called "Service of documents": Don't see much difference to Australia here: See sections "Who do you serve the documents on" and below. So everyone knows what the document looks like I should say at this point that I have already completed the job I went with "Return receipt required" , but have not stopped thinking about this tricky little phrase. Your first discussion post regarding attorneys signing forms didn't have a clear connection for me to the ordinary citizen i. It still remains unclear to me why the date that his acknowledgement was received back by the authorities would be critical.

In your third post, the link to the Family Court of Australia suggests another possible translation: Would you like to venture a translation too? While I did not originally favour the somewhat fragmentary translations like "against acknowledgement of receipt" or "upon acknowledgement of service", it's possible that I was not putting due weight on the fact that "gegen Empfangsbekenntnis" may itself be a fragment of the fuller phrase "Zustellung gegen Empfangsbekenntnis".

Dear David, First off, thanks for your feedback. If there are any more questions, please let me know. However, you asked about the difference between those two civil code sections and narrows down the group to which it applies. From the "Service Kit" see the page showing a "1" in a circle at the top right-hand corner, after the pages with letters: You did ask for "legalese," or am I wrong? However, if you ask me, I much prefer your first version in reply to Susan: First, my sincerest apologies for putting in the wrong name.

Thieme E-Journals - Klinische Monatsblätter für Augenheilkunde / Abstract

I tend to answer "in bulk," i. Very rarely, this has unintended side effects I googled a bit again, as promised, and here's my explanation. You can tell me what you think. Except for one link I could find https: This means that the document may be about an "ordinary citizen," but is not send to him or her, or this person is part of the authorities.

KudoZ™ translation help

Here's another link to prove my point: Ir relevance of the ZPO — part I. I should confess that I referred to the clauses of the ZPO only because they seemed initially to cover the definition of "[ As far as I gather, my client had been serving in the Zivildienst, and nearing the end of that service the relevant Bundesamt sent out a written advice regarding the client's discharge. Initially I expected that the letter would have been sent directly to my client. However, taking everything into account, it seems most likely that it was sent to the Dienststelle where my client fulfilled the Zivildienst.

I still don't see this as being something I would have thought of as being 'served' [although I'm not a legal expert], as it looks more like the term had simply run its normal course. Hence, "Sie werden [ I suppose if the letter did not get through to the Dienststelle or the citizen , then hypothetically the state could end up 'exploiting' the citizen if they served beyond the period they were obliged to.

And requiring a written acknowledgement of receipt would avoid this. Although the ZPO was an obvious reference for the phase, it turns out that it's not the only possibility. Back to the main issue: First, though, I hesitate to use the word "service" unless the communication clearly falls into that category e. I would have thought that only 'legal documents' are "served", i. Based on your explanation of the 'intuitively obvious' meaning of "gegen Empfangsbekenntnis" to the average German, I would have to exclude "against acknowledgement of receipt" , because — besides sounding unnatural — I doubt its intended meaning would be understood by most native speakers of English due to a combination of ellipsis and the rather uncommon use of "against".

If choosing between "Please acknowledge receipt" and "Acknowledgement of receipt is required" , my feeling is that the former is somewhat less likely to elicit a response than the latter option. I'm sure that saying "please" would not, of itself, automatically mean that there was no legal obligation e. But, on the other hand, it doesn't indicate or even suggest an obligation either. Actually, I suspect that there may not be a 'legal obligation' to respond. In other words, if the recipient didn't send back any acknowledgement, could they be specifically penalised for that?

Best-selling in Law

However, "Acknowledgement of receipt is required" does not have to mean "Acknowledgement of receipt is required by law and otherwise you'll be thrown in jail ". It can also mean "Acknowledgement of receipt is required for this process to run smoothly and to avoid causing us unwarranted difficulties ". In favour of the former option is that it is more concise. Having said that, I also agree with you that "Acknowledge receipt! So, overall I am now leaning towards "Please acknowledge receipt" as the most fitting translation.

Thanks for the great insights. I think you should post a synopsis as a suggested answer.

gegen Empfangsbekenntnis

Kind regards, David P. No worries about what I guess was an innocent 'typo' that has since been corrected.

To the fact that 'service' is a red herring here - this does not seem to be a legal document - the sender simply wants acknowledgement of receipt. Many thanks for your detailed response! Also thanks to Allegro for his comment. I'd still like to reply to certain statements you and Allegro made before this question is closed. I'll be doing that later today if that's OK. One thing I can say right now, though: I prefer "acknowledge receipt" to anything with "signed" only, precisely because you have to sign and date it. This may seem like hypercorrectness, but a see these examples of "sign and date": As you said further below: I've been reading up a bit, so yes, I think you and Allegro are correct that "service" isn't the best word here.

The process looks quite similar to me cf. From the same link one post below: Not sure about government departments, but I imagine that the outcome won't be much different. To Allegro's comment second sentence:

• Wealth and Poverty: A New Edition for the Twenty-First Century
• Trás-os-montes (Spanish Edition)
• Attention and Interpretation: A scientific approach to insight in psycho-analysis and groups: Volume 5
• Harry Hembock Regurgitations (Harry Hembock Series Book 3)
• Passion en Australie (Harlequin Horizon) (French Edition)
• Part 2 - The Skillful Teacher: Building Your Teaching Skills
• The Dying Breed’s Soul (The Soulstealer)