Cancellation of the notice of termination of pension payments for years of service
No. 6001-24-00-6ap/2806 (2) dated February 27, 2025
Plaintiff: G.A.
Respondent: GU "Police Department" (hereinafter referred to as the Department)
Subject of dispute: cancellation of the notice of termination of superannuation payments dated February 1, 2020
Review of the plaintiff's cassation complaint PLOT:
On December 4, 2009, G.A. was awarded an incomplete retirement pension, starting from November 20, 2009.
Starting from February 1, 2020, pension payments were terminated due to the departure of the plaintiff for permanent residence in the Russian Federation (hereinafter referred to as the Russian Federation).
On March 25, 2021, the plaintiff's pension case was sent to the Pension Service Center of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia.
On June 25, 2020, the plaintiff accepted Russian citizenship.
On August 18, 2021, the plaintiff sent an application to the Department for the resumption of her superannuation payments, in connection with the refusal in the Russian Federation to assign her the specified pension payments.
The Department provided answers about the absence of grounds for resuming payments.
On November 28, 2022, the plaintiff received a residence permit for a foreigner in the Republic of Kazakhstan.
On December 7, 2022, the plaintiff filed an application with the Department for the resumption of pension payments and basic pension payments from February 1, 2020.
The plaintiff's superannuation payments were resumed on December 7, 2022.
On January 6, 2023, the plaintiff applied to the Department for the calculation and indexation of unclaimed superannuation payments, starting on February 1, 2020.
On January 24, 2023, the Department refused to satisfy the specified application.
Considering this refusal to be illegal, the plaintiff appealed to the court.
Judicial acts:
1st instance: the claim was denied. By a court ruling, the administrative claim regarding the cancellation of the adopted administrative acts of September 1, 2021, November 2, 2021, February 22, 2024, March 7, 2024, as well as the compulsion to continue pension payments at the place of residence in the Russian Federation, was returned.
Appeal: the decision and ruling of the court of first instance are left unchanged.
Cassation: the decision of the court of first instance and the decision of the appeal in this case are annulled. Administrative claim of G.A. to the State Institution
The "Police Department" on the cancellation of the notice of termination of superannuation payments dated February 1, 2020, has been returned.
The ruling of the court of first instance and the ruling of the appeal in this case remain in force.
Conclusions: the decision of the specialized interdistrict administrative court of June 21, 2023, which entered into force, denied the claim.
The judicial act established that the resumption of payments from the date of application complies with the legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan and does not contradict international legislation. The national legislation does not contain norms allowing pension payments to be resumed from a date earlier than the day of application.
On February 12, 2024, the plaintiff filed a pre-trial complaint against the notification The Department's decision on termination of pension payments dated February 1, 2020.
On March 7, 2024, the Ministry of Internal Affairs refused to review the notification.
On March 11, the plaintiff filed this lawsuit with the court.
By local courts, the plaintiff's claims for the cancellation of the adopted administrative acts of September 1, 2021, November 2, 2021,
On February 22, 2024, March 7, 2024, as well as the obligation to continue pension payments at the place of residence in the Russian Federation, were reasonably returned on the basis of subparagraph 11) of the second part of Article 138 of the CPC, as not subject to consideration in administrative proceedings.
The request to cancel the notice of termination of superannuation payments dated February 1, 2020, was considered on its merits, with the claim dismissed.
The conclusions of the courts on the refusal to satisfy the claim are motivated by,
that the termination of pension payments for years of service upon departure for permanent residence outside the Republic of Kazakhstan is conditioned by the norms of the current "Agreement on the procedure for pension provision and State Insurance of employees of the Internal Affairs bodies of the CIS Member States" dated December 24, 1993 (hereinafter referred to as the 1993 Agreement), to which the Russian Federation and the Republic of Kazakhstan.
It follows from article 1 of the 1993 Agreement that pension provision for employees of the internal affairs bodies of the Parties, as well as pension provision for their families, is carried out on the terms, standards and in accordance with the procedure established or to be established by the legislation of the Parties in whose territory they permanently reside.
The Judicial Board concluded that the local courts had accepted the claim, which was subject to return.
By the decision of the specialized interdistrict administrative court of June 21, 2023, which entered into force, the dispute between G.A. and the Department regarding the calculation and indexation of unclaimed pension payments for years of service, starting from February 1, 2020, was resolved, the claim was denied.
The courts, including the cassation instance, have recognized the refusal to resume pension payments for years of service from February 1, 2020 as legitimate and in accordance with the requirements of current legislation.
The above-mentioned judicial acts confirm that the plaintiff's right to judicial protection in this matter has been implemented and is not subject to reconsideration.
The present claim concerns the same subject and is filed on the same grounds.
It should be noted that the defendant, aware of the existence of a judicial act that had entered into force on G.A.'s refusal to protect her rights, did not terminate the administrative procedure for reviewing the next appeal, as provided for in subparagraph 2) the first part of Article 70 of the CPC, thereby providing a formal opportunity to go to court, effectively creating bureaucratic red tape.
The local courts, violating the requirements of the APPC, accepted the claim and considered the case on its merits, while the claim was subject to refund.
By canceling judicial acts and returning the claim, the judicial board considered it necessary to explain to the plaintiff that, by virtue of part three of Article 138 of the CPC, the return of the claim on the above grounds prevents a second appeal to the court with a claim against the same defendant, on the same subject and on the same grounds.
In the circumstances described, judicial acts of local courts are subject to cancellation, and an administrative claim is returned.
Attention!
Law and Law Law Law draws your attention to the fact that this document is basic and does not always meet the requirements of a particular situation. Our lawyers are ready to assist you in legal advice, drawing up any legal document suitable for your situation.
For more information, please contact a Lawyer / Attorney by phone: +7 (708) 971-78-58; +7 (700) 978 5755, +7 (700) 978 5085.
Attorney at Law Almaty Lawyer Legal Services Legal Advice Civil Criminal Administrative Cases Disputes Protection Arbitration Law Firm Kazakhstan Law Office Court Cases
