The Supreme Court protected the right of a civil servant to pension appointment after the reorganization of a state body

The Supreme Court, in the composition of the panel of judges of the Cassation Administrative Court, reviewed case No. 560/6263/24 concerning the legality of the tax authority's refusal to issue a former civil servant certificates of salary components for the appointment of a civil servant pension. The Court concluded that such refusal was unlawful and dismissed the cassation appeal of the State Tax Service.

Case summary

The plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Main Department of the State Tax Service in Khmelnytskyi region, requesting to recognize the refusal to issue certificates of salary components for the appointment of a civil servant pension for December 2023 as unlawful and to oblige the tax authority to issue the relevant certificates for an equivalent position at the last place of civil service according to the forms approved by the Pension Fund of Ukraine Board Resolution No. 1-3.

The plaintiff stated that she worked in the bodies of the State Tax Service of Ukraine from July 11, 1990, to March 31, 2014, with her last position being chief state auditor-inspector of the Chemerovetskyi department of the Horodok united state tax inspectorate. After dismissal, she acquired the right to pension benefits as a person with over 20 years of civil service experience.

In January 2024, the plaintiff applied to the Main Department of the State Tax Service in Khmelnytskyi region with a request to issue certificates of salary components for December 2023 for the corresponding (equivalent) position.

By letter dated January 25, 2024, the defendant refused to issue the certificates, justifying this by the absence of a position in the structure of the Main Department of the State Tax Service that could be equated to the position of chief state auditor-inspector of the Chemerovetskyi department of the Horodok united state tax inspectorate. At the same time, the plaintiff was advised to contact social protection departments.

Disagreeing with this refusal, the plaintiff appealed to the administrative court, believing that the tax authority, as the legal successor of the liquidated tax service bodies, should issue the necessary certificates for pension appointment.

Positions of the courts of first and appellate instances

The Khmelnytskyi District Administrative Court denied the claim. The court reasoned that the plaintiff was dismissed from civil service back in 2014, and therefore the use of salary components as of December 2023, for which she did not pay insurance contributions, would contradict the requirements of Article 37 of the Law of Ukraine "On Civil Service" as in force before May 1, 2016. According to the first instance court, there were no grounds for issuing the certificates.

The Seventh Administrative Court of Appeal disagreed with these conclusions. The appellate court overturned the decision of the first instance court and satisfied the claim. The court concluded that the plaintiff has the right to receive certificates of salary components for pension appointment as a person with over 20 years of civil service experience who was dismissed before May 1, 2016, and therefore the defendant was obliged to issue such certificates in accordance with Procedure No. 750 and Pension Fund Board Resolution No. 1-3.

Legal position of the Supreme Court

Reviewing the case in cassation, the Supreme Court proceeded from the fact that the dispute concerns the right of a former civil servant to receive certificates of salary components necessary to exercise the right to a civil servant pension under Article 37 of the Law of Ukraine "On Civil Service" No. 3723-XII.

The Court noted that paragraphs 10 and 12 of Section XI "Final and Transitional Provisions" of the Law of Ukraine "On Civil Service" No. 889-VIII preserved the right to a civil servant pension for certain categories of persons who had the required civil service experience on the date this Law came into force.

The Supreme Court drew attention to the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine Resolution No. 622 dated September 14, 2016, which approved the Procedure for appointing pensions to certain categories of persons, defining the mechanism for exercising the right to a civil servant pension. Subsequently, Pension Fund Board Resolution No. 1-3 approved the forms of certificates of salary components submitted for such pension appointment.

The Court noted that Procedure No. 750 provides a mechanism for determining positions equated to civil service positions held by persons before dismissal. Based on this mechanism, the state body where the person served or its legal successor must determine the appropriate equivalent position and issue certificates of salary components.

The panel of judges emphasized that the absence of a position with an identical title in the current structure of the state body does not exempt this body from the obligation to apply the position equivalence mechanism defined by normative acts. The legislation provides this procedure precisely for such cases.

The Supreme Court also took into account the previously established legal position regarding similar legal relations, according to which the issuance of certificates of salary components is a necessary prerequisite for exercising the right to pension benefits, and the state body has no right to refuse their issuance solely on the grounds of the absence of an equivalent position in the current staffing schedule.

The Supreme Court agreed with the appellate court's conclusion that the Main Department of the State Tax Service in Khmelnytskyi region unjustifiably refused to issue the plaintiff certificates of salary components.

The Court noted that the defendant should have determined the equivalent position according to Procedure No. 750 and issued certificates in the forms approved by Pension Fund Board Resolution No. 1-3, rather than refusing to issue them citing the absence of an equivalent position in its structure.

The panel of judges stressed that the right to a civil servant pension guaranteed by law cannot be limited due to the reorganization of state bodies or changes in their organizational structure. Such circumstances do not deprive a person of the right to receive documents necessary to exercise the right to pension benefits.

The Supreme Court concluded that the appellate court's ruling complies with the requirements of substantive and procedural law, correctly applies the provisions of the Law of Ukraine "On Civil Service", Procedure No. 622, Procedure No. 750, and Pension Fund Board Resolution No. 1-3.

As a result of the cassation review, the Supreme Court dismissed the cassation appeal of the Main Department of the State Tax Service in Khmelnytskyi region and left the ruling of the Seventh Administrative Court of Appeal unchanged.

The cassation court ruling enters into legal force from the date of its adoption and is not subject to appeal.

Subscribe to our Telegram channel t.me/sudua and to Google News SUD.UA, as well as to our VIBER and WhatsApp, Facebook page and Instagram account to stay informed about the most important events.