In Case of Non-Compliance with Obligations Determined by Law, Public Authority Shall Compensate Damage Regardless the Moment, when Court Established Individual’s Right Violation – SC GC

Plaintiff applied to court with claim to the Department of the Pension Fund of Ukraine demanding to collect from the defendant the damage caused with inappropriate fulfillment of resolution of appeal administrative court.

Herewith, the plaintiff noted that he was a disabled person of the II group from among participants of the liquidation of the disaster on the Chornobyl Nuclear Power Plant; by 2011 he had received pension calculated from the salary paid while his work in the Zone of Alienation. Since January 2012 the defendant has re-calculated the plaintiff’s disability pension as a participant of the liquidation of the disaster on the Chornobyl Nuclear Power Plant in the minimal amount.

Vinnytsia Appeal Administrative Court in its resolution of 10 July 2013 recognized as invalid the refusal of the PFU Department to re-calculate the plaintiff’s pension from his salary for work in the Alienation Zone in June 1986 and obliged the defendant to hold its re-calculation pursuant to the plaintiff’s demands.

Within the judgment execution, the recalculation pension for the period from
1 January 2012 till 15 July 2013 had been held; however, the plaintiff received relevant funds only in May 2015.

Local court adopted a judgment on partial satisfaction of the claim. The appeal court changed this judgment in terms of the compensation sum; the other part was not changed.

In the cassation appeal the defendant stated that its actions by the moment of the adoption of judgment in the plaintiff’s favor had been lawful; therefore, the defendant had faced the obligation to pay recalculated pension to the plaintiff from the moment, when the court had issued executive document. Besides, while pointing on the jurisdiction of administrative court regarding this dispute, the defendant remarked that it was the subject of public authority, thus the dispute was public and legal.

While solving the issue of jurisdictional affiliation of the dispute, the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court noted that the plaintiff submitted a claim on the compensation of damage without the demand to solve public and legal dispute, the case concerned the protection of the plaintiff’s right to compensation caused by the delay of the payment of pension in appropriate amount, thus, the administrative court was not authorized to solve such dispute.

The Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court also recognized as unjustified the defendant’s assertions that it had been obliged to pay recalculated pension only from the moment, when court had issued the relevant executive document, since pursuant to pension law the defendant had the duties to calculate, re-calculate and pay pension. These duties did not appear after a judgment issuing.

The judicial recognition of the defendant’s actions as invalid while holding re-calculation of the plaintiff’s pension and the defendant’s obligation to hold such re-calculation confirm the fact of inappropriate compliance with the noted duties in the past. Therefore, there is no any reason to consider that by the day, when the relevant judgment came into force, the defendant had acted lawfully and had not permitted the delay of performing the obligation.

Follow the link http://www.reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/83617116, to see the full text of the resolution of the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court of 3 July 2019 in the case No. 676/1557/16-ц (proceeding No. 14-197цс19).