The article is about a legal dispute regarding the entitlement to a disability pension. A woman lost her part-time job due to health problems and subsequently applied for a full disability pension. The pension insurance rejected the application and instead granted a partial disability pension. The woman then filed a lawsuit and demanded the revocation of the decision and the payment of a disability pension. The district where the woman was employed confirmed that there was no offer for continued employment. In the present case, the plaintiff was offered continued employment for three hours in the environmental department, waste management department, as a waste fee collector. The social court sentenced the defendant to grant the plaintiff a full disability pension for the period from January 1, 2019, to December 31, 2021. The defendant appealed against this judgment and argued that the lawsuit should be dismissed. The State Social Court upheld the appeal and determined that the plaintiff is not entitled to a full disability pension. The administrative act that granted her a partial disability pension became unlawful as of December 31, 2018, as the employment relationship between the plaintiff and the district was terminated. The present text concerns a legal dispute regarding the insurance requirements for entitlement to a disability pension. The plaintiff had suffered a work accident and subsequently applied for a pension. The pension insurance provider rejected the application because the general waiting period of 60 months was not fulfilled and the plaintiff was not insured at the time of the accident. The plaintiff filed an appeal, but it was dismissed because it could not be clearly established whether the plaintiff was insured at the time of the accident. The decision of the State Social Court was confirmed. The plaintiff first applied for a disability pension in October 2013. The old and new laws regarding pensions due to reduced earning capacity only differ in terms of health requirements. The insurance requirements for a disability pension have remained the same. The plaintiff has not yet fulfilled the general waiting period, so he can only receive a disability pension if he has become partially disabled due to a work accident. However, the State Social Court could not determine that the plaintiff was insured at the time of the accident. The text deals with the legal provisions regarding marginal employment and the question of whether such employment is subject to mandatory insurance or exempt from insurance. It is emphasized that at the time of the start of employment, it must already be determined whether there is mandatory insurance or exemption from insurance. This requires a forward-looking prognosis based on the knowledge available at that time. Even when deciding on mandatory or exempt insurance for a past period, a forward-looking prognosis must be made. The employment contract is to be considered as the decisive factor. In the case of fluctuating employment [Extracted from the article]