Recognition of Preferential Service Acquired Abroad for a Pension in Ukraine

Preferential service acquired while working in another country may be taken into account when determining a person’s pension entitlement in Ukraine. The Supreme Court reached this conclusion in another pension dispute.

The case concerned a claimant who had worked in the Russian Federation in occupations that may qualify as preferential employment for pension purposes in Ukraine. However, the claimant was unable to provide certain documents required under Ukrainian pension legislation.

The claimant applied to the court after the Pension Fund of Ukraine refused to grant a pension. According to the Pension Fund, the claimant did not have sufficient qualifying service to become entitled to the pension.

During the 1990s, the claimant worked in the Russian Federation. However, several issues prevented the relevant periods of employment from being recognised without dispute. In the first case, the employment record book contained corrections concerning the date of dismissal. In the second case, documents confirming workplace certification were unavailable. In the third case, the work performed by the claimant during the relevant period was not classified as preferential employment at that time and was not subject to workplace certification.

The courts concluded that the Pension Fund’s refusal was unlawful in part and reached the following conclusions.

Regarding the first period: although the employment record book contained corrections that had not been made in accordance with the applicable formal requirements, the relevant period of employment had to be taken into account because the actual period of work could be reliably established from the employment record book and the other circumstances of the case.

Regarding the second period: since the claimant had worked in the Russian Federation, requiring documents confirming workplace certification specifically in accordance with Ukrainian legislation was considered unjustified. Employment performed in another country cannot automatically be assessed solely on the basis of Ukrainian requirements governing workplace certification.

Regarding the third period: the court did not uphold the claimant’s arguments. As a general rule, the legislation applicable at the time when the relevant employment relationship existed must be taken into account. Therefore, a period of work could not be recognised as preferential service where, at the relevant time, that occupation was not classified as preferential employment and was not subject to the applicable certification requirements.

Thus, employment and preferential service acquired abroad may be relevant when determining pension entitlement in Ukraine. At the same time, each period of employment must be assessed individually, taking into account the legislation applicable at the time and place where the work was performed, as well as the available evidence confirming the nature and duration of employment.

The relevant court decision is available at the following link: https://reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/99482213