II UZP 21/95 AI generated

Supreme Court ruled unemployment gaps after benefit cessation are not contributory periods for family pension.

Case Number II UZP 21/95

Court / Authority Sąd Najwyższy

Jurisdiction

Poland (PL)

Decision Date 1995-11-17

Outcome Dismissed

Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The Supreme Court dismissed the legal question regarding whether unemployment periods after unemployment benefit cessation count as contributory periods. The applicant argued that the entire period of unemployment should be recognized, while the Court noted the specific statutory limitation introduced in 1991. The decision established that only periods where benefits were actually received qualify as contributory, excluding gaps caused by inability to receive benefits.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Art. 2 ust. 1 pkt 1 ustawy z dnia 17 października 1991 r. o rewaloryzacji emerytur i rent; Art. 24 ust. 3 ustawy z dnia 16 października 1991 r. o zatrudnieniu i bezrobociu: Periods of unemployment following the cessation of unemployment benefits are not considered contributory periods for family pension purposes.

Keywords

AI generated

family pension eligibility unemployment benefit cessation contributory periods strict statutory interpretation social security contributions unemployment insurance gap pension revaluation law

Cited Legislation

AI generated

Art. 2 ust. 1 pkt 1 ustawy z dnia 17 października 1991 r. o rewaloryzacji emerytur i rent, o zasadach ustalania emerytur i rent oraz o zmianie niektórych ustaw

Art. 24 ust. 3 ustawy z dnia 16 października 1991 r. o zatrudnieniu i bezrobociu

Art. 30 ust. 1 ustawy z dnia 14 grudnia 1994 r. o zatrudnieniu i przeciwdziałaniu bezrobociu

art. 391 k.p.c

Supreme Court ruled unemployment gaps after benefit cessation are not contributory periods for family pension.

Legislator summary

Legislator headnote

Keywords

Cited Legislation

Need to analyze how this precedent applies to your matter?

Full text