Can an Error in an Employment Record Book Be Grounds for Refusing a Pension in Ukraine?

In May 2024, the Khmelnytskyi District Administrative Court delivered a judgment concerning a challenge to a decision of the Pension Fund of Ukraine refusing to grant an old-age pension.

Our client, Serhii Maier, applied to the Pension Fund for an old-age pension. However, his application was refused on the grounds that he did not have the required insurance record. The main problem arose from an incorrect entry in his employment record book, where his patronymic had been corrected from “Evoldovych” to “Evaldovych” without the correction being properly certified. As a result, the Pension Fund refused to include all periods of employment recorded in his employment record book in his insurance record.

The lawyer from our Pension Center who handled the case emphasised that such corrections should not constitute grounds for refusing to include the relevant periods of employment in the insurance record. Under the applicable legislation, formal deficiencies in an employment record book cannot automatically affect a person’s social security rights. Our lawyer also referred to Supreme Court case law confirming that responsibility for the proper maintenance of employment records should not be imposed on the employee.

The court agreed with our lawyer’s arguments that improper completion of an employment record book should not deprive a person of the right to a pension. The decisive factor is confirmation of the actual period of employment rather than absolute technical accuracy of the entries in the employment record book. In addition, the court noted that the Pension Fund had failed to properly assess the documents confirming the claimant’s employment record and had not taken into account all relevant periods of employment.

In its judgment, the court overturned the Pension Fund’s decision refusing to grant the pension, ordered the relevant periods of the claimant’s employment to be included in his insurance record and required the pension authority to reconsider his application, taking into account the court’s conclusions.

This case demonstrates the importance of professional legal representation and a properly developed legal position in pension disputes. The Pension Center lawyer presented arguments based on the applicable legislation and relevant court practice, which made it possible to establish that the Pension Fund’s actions were unlawful. As a result of qualified legal representation, Serhii Maier obtained the opportunity to have his pension application reconsidered and his entitlement to a pension properly assessed.