Five years ago, a family with children came to Skåne.
Staffanstorp municipality was then given responsibility for arranging housing for the family, which the municipality did by offering a second-hand contract in Malmö.
According to the Settlement Act, a municipality is obliged to receive a newly arrived immigrant for residence in the municipality.
Each municipality also has the ultimate responsibility for giving the people the support and help they need.
When the lease ended, the family turned to the labor market committee in Staffanstorp for help with a new home.
But the board rejected the application and referred to the fact that the family did not live in the municipality.
Bowled between municipalities
According to the Social Services Act, the basic principle is that the municipality where the individual resides has the ultimate responsibility for ensuring that he or she receives the support and help that the individual needs.
Normally, the municipality of residence has that responsibility.
But according to a special provision, a municipality can be responsible even though a person is neither staying nor living in the municipality.
In the judgment, the Supreme Administrative Court states that the family stayed in Malmö as a result of a decision in Staffanstorp and therefore there was no clarified municipality of residence when the family needed new housing.
According to Tuesday's ruling, it was Staffanstorp municipality that was responsible for the family's housing, a responsibility that would last until the need ceased or the matter was transferred to Malmö municipality.