Pension for Years of Service for Prosecutors in Ukraine

A man who had worked in the prosecution service for many years applied to the Pension Fund of Ukraine in October 2017 for a pension for years of service.

However, the Pension Fund refused to grant him the pension. The refusal was based on legislative amendments introduced by the Law of Ukraine of 2 March 2015, which repealed a number of provisions governing special pension benefits, including certain pension provisions contained in the previous Law of Ukraine “On the Prosecutor’s Office”.

To understand the dispute, it is important to distinguish between different versions of the legislation governing the prosecution service.

For many years, pension rights of prosecutors were regulated by the 1991 Law of Ukraine “On the Prosecutor’s Office”. Subsequently, a new Law of Ukraine “On the Prosecutor’s Office” was adopted on 14 October 2014, with its relevant provisions entering into force in 2015.

The claimant challenged the Pension Fund’s refusal before the court. He argued that he had accumulated sufficient qualifying service to receive a pension for years of service under the provisions of the new legislation governing the prosecution service.

The central legal question considered by the Supreme Court was therefore: which legislation should be applied when determining a prosecutor’s entitlement to a pension for years of service?

The Supreme Court analysed the relationship between the Law of 2 March 2015, which repealed certain special pension provisions, and the new Law of Ukraine “On the Prosecutor’s Office”.

The Court concluded that the Law of 2 March 2015 had indeed repealed the relevant pension provisions contained in the 1991 Law “On the Prosecutor’s Office”.

However, this did not mean that the same Law automatically repealed the pension provisions contained in the new Law “On the Prosecutor’s Office” adopted on 14 October 2014 and brought into force subsequently.

In other words, the Pension Fund could not rely on the repeal of provisions of the old 1991 Law as grounds for disregarding pension rights arising under the subsequently applicable legislation.

When determining entitlement to a pension, the competent authority must apply the legislation governing the particular pension right at the legally relevant time. Therefore, it was necessary to examine whether the claimant satisfied the conditions for a pension for years of service established by the applicable version of the new Law of Ukraine “On the Prosecutor’s Office”.

The Supreme Court’s position demonstrates an important principle in pension disputes: the repeal of pension provisions contained in an earlier law does not automatically eliminate rights provided for by another legislative act that subsequently became applicable.

Accordingly, the Pension Fund’s refusal to grant the claimant a pension for years of service solely on the basis that the previous pension provisions for prosecutors had been repealed was not legally justified.

The claimant’s entitlement had to be determined under the provisions of the new Law of Ukraine “On the Prosecutor’s Office” adopted on 14 October 2014, taking into account the qualifying service accumulated by him and the statutory requirements applicable when he applied for the pension.

Therefore, where the Pension Fund refuses to grant a former prosecutor a pension for years of service, it is necessary to determine precisely which version of the legislation applied on the date when the person acquired or sought to exercise the pension right. An incorrect choice of the applicable legislation may provide grounds for challenging the Pension Fund’s refusal before an administrative court.