How to Apply for a Ukrainian Pension While Living in Israel

A person filed a claim against the Main Department of the Pension Fund of Ukraine, requesting the court to oblige the Pension Fund to grant and pay an old-age pension from the date of the initial application in the amount determined in accordance with the Law of Ukraine No. 1058-IV dated July 9, 2003, including indexation and compensation for the loss of part of the income.

The Dnipropetrovsk District Administrative Court dismissed the claim, and the Third Administrative Court of Appeal upheld that decision.

The claimant subsequently filed a cassation appeal with the Supreme Court.

The courts of previous instances established that the claimant had resided in Ukraine and subsequently moved permanently to Israel, which was not disputed by the parties. The claimant's representative submitted an application for an old-age pension, together with copies of the relevant documents, to the Main Department of the Pension Fund of Ukraine in the Dnipropetrovsk Region, which was responsible for considering the claimant's pension application. The application was rejected due to the absence of documents confirming the claimant's place of residence (registration) and age, without which, according to the Pension Fund, the pension could not be granted.

Disagreeing with the decision of the Main Department of the Pension Fund of Ukraine in the Dnipropetrovsk Region, the claimant brought the case before the court. In support of the claim, the claimant stated that they were a citizen of Ukraine and had resided in Ukraine until September 30, 1994, after which they moved permanently to the State of Israel and were registered with the Ukrainian consular authorities. The claimant argued that the Pension Fund's refusal was contrary to applicable law and violated their rights and legitimate interests.

The Dnipropetrovsk District Administrative Court, whose findings were upheld by the appellate court, dismissed the claim on the ground that the claimant had failed to provide the principal document confirming their identity as a citizen of Ukraine. According to the courts, the absence of such a document made it impossible to examine the claimant's documents for the purpose of determining pension entitlement and to adopt a decision on granting a pension, regardless of the type of pension concerned.

Supreme Court's conclusions. In the cassation appeal, the claimant's representative disagreed with the decisions of the Dnipropetrovsk District Administrative Court and the Third Administrative Court of Appeal, arguing that the courts had failed to take into account that the claimant was a citizen of Ukraine, as confirmed by a Ukrainian passport for travel abroad. The claimant's Ukrainian citizenship had never been terminated. The claimant's internal Ukrainian passport had been withdrawn when the claimant left Ukraine for permanent residence abroad.

The claimant also had a valid identity document containing information about their identity, place of residence and age. On the basis of this document, the claimant's identity had been verified by an Israeli notary when the power of attorney and the pension application were signed.

The Supreme Court established that, after receiving the claimant's representative's application dated October 10, 2019, the claimant's pension application and copies of the accompanying documents, the Pension Fund, contrary to paragraphs 3.3 and 4.2 of Procedure No. 22-1, failed to adopt the required procedural decision either granting or refusing to grant the pension. Instead, it unlawfully considered the application under the procedure established by Law of Ukraine No. 393/96-VR on citizens' appeals, thereby violating the claimant's rights and legitimate interests.

In view of these circumstances, the Supreme Court concluded that it was necessary to go beyond the scope of the claims and order the Pension Fund to properly consider the claimant's application for a pension in accordance with the requirements of Law No. 1058-IV and Procedure No. 22-1.

Taking into account that the lower courts had incorrectly applied Articles 25 and 46 of the Constitution of Ukraine, Law No. 1058-IV and Procedure No. 22-1 concerning the procedure for considering and deciding pension applications, the Supreme Court concluded that the judgments of the lower courts had to be set aside and a new judgment partially granting the claim had to be delivered.

Accordingly, the Supreme Court set aside the judgment of the Dnipropetrovsk District Administrative Court and the judgment of the Third Administrative Court of Appeal and adopted a new decision partially granting the claim. The Main Department of the Pension Fund of Ukraine in the Dnipropetrovsk Region was ordered to consider the claimant's application for a pension in accordance with the requirements of Law of Ukraine No. 1058-IV dated July 9, 2003.

The judgment of the Supreme Court dated September 9, 2021, in case No. 160/12588/19 is available at the Unified State Register of Court Decisions: https://reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/99482176