Pension in Ukraine Without Confirmation of Termination of Pension Payments in Russia

Analysis of the Supreme Court Judgment in Case No. 580/3576/22

On 17 September 2024, the Supreme Court of Ukraine delivered its judgment in case No. 580/3576/22, which is an important decision in the field of pension provision for persons who previously worked in CIS countries.

According to the circumstances of the case, the claimant filed an administrative claim against the Main Departments of the Pension Fund of Ukraine (PFU) in Kyiv and Cherkasy Region concerning the refusal to grant him a pension.

The claimant is a citizen of the Russian Federation who moved to Ukraine. However, the Pension Fund refused to grant him a pension, referring to the fact that pension payments allegedly continued to be accrued in Russia and that the claimant had failed to provide confirmation that those payments had been terminated.

The Pension Fund justified its decision on the following grounds:

1) there was no evidence confirming the termination of pension payments in Russia;

2) the territorial bodies of the Pension Fund were not obliged to obtain such documents themselves;

3) a pension in Ukraine could only be granted after confirmation that pension payments in Russia had been terminated.

In February 2023, the Cherkasy District Administrative Court dismissed the claimant's case.

The court based its decision on the following considerations:

1) the claimant's employment record book indicated that he had been dismissed from his employment in the Russian Federation due to retirement;

2) no evidence had been provided confirming the termination of pension payments in Russia;

3) under the CIS Agreement on Guarantees of the Rights of Citizens of the CIS Member States in the Field of Pension Provision, simultaneous receipt of pensions in two countries was considered inconsistent with the principles of that Agreement.

In September 2023, the Sixth Administrative Court of Appeal upheld the judgment of the court of first instance. The appellate court additionally noted that, pursuant to Resolution of the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine No. 1328 dated 29 November 2022, Ukraine withdrew from the CIS Agreement and its provisions ceased to apply to Ukraine in May 2023. However, according to the appellate court, even while the Agreement remained in force, a pension in Ukraine could only be granted after confirmation that pension payments in the Russian Federation had been terminated.

The claimant lodged a cassation appeal with the Supreme Court, arguing that his right to a pension could not depend on his ability to obtain documents from the Russian Federation, particularly under martial law and in the absence of official interstate correspondence.

Ukrainian legislation and Ukraine's international obligations guarantee the right to pension provision regardless of circumstances relating to the receipt of a pension at a person's previous place of residence.

In its judgment, the Supreme Court emphasised that the Constitution of Ukraine guarantees the right to social protection, including pension provision. International treaties ratified by Ukraine form part of national legislation. The provisions of the CIS Agreement were still in force at the time when the claimant applied to the Pension Fund and therefore had to be taken into account when deciding his pension application.

The Supreme Court held that neither the CIS Agreement nor Ukrainian legislation required a person to provide confirmation of the termination of pension payments abroad as a mandatory condition for obtaining a pension in Ukraine. The requirement to provide such documents was not established by applicable law and was therefore unlawful. Moreover, Russia's aggression against Ukraine and the lack of access to Russian public authorities made it objectively impossible to obtain confirmation of the termination of pension payments in the Russian Federation.

By its judgment, the Supreme Court overturned the decisions of the courts of first instance and appeal, declared the Pension Fund's refusal to grant the pension unlawful and ordered the relevant Pension Fund authority to reconsider the claimant's application, taking into account the Supreme Court's conclusions in this case.

This Supreme Court judgment is an important decision clarifying the application of international agreements in the field of pension provision. It confirms that a refusal to grant a pension based on the absence of documents from the aggressor state may constitute an unlawful restriction of a person's pension rights.

This judgment may also serve as important guidance in other similar cases, particularly for persons who have lost access to documents as a result of war or other objective circumstances beyond their control.

The lawyers and attorneys of the Pension Center have extensive experience in handling similar pension disputes. We provide:

• Legal advice on obtaining pensions in Ukraine for Ukrainian citizens and foreign nationals.
• Preparation of applications and other submissions to the Pension Fund of Ukraine and other public authorities.
• Legal representation in court proceedings.

Contact us to receive professional legal assistance and protection of your pension rights. Our lawyers are ready to help you challenge unlawful decisions and exercise the rights guaranteed to you under Ukrainian law.