Legislator Giurisprudenza & Legislazione
DE FR IT EN
Analizza in Legislator
I UK 41/05 Generato dall'IA

Court dismissed early retirement claim because specific work tasks were not listed in the official government annexes.

Numero d'incarto I UK 41/05
Autorità giudiziaria
Giurisdizione Polonia (PL)
Data della decisione
Esito del giudizio Respinto (Dismissed)
Apri la fonte ufficiale Versione Markdown leggibile dalle macchine (.md)

Sintesi Legislator

Generato dall'IA

The Supreme Court dismissed Ryszard S.'s appeal against the Social Insurance Institution's refusal of early retirement benefits. The insured claimed he worked in special conditions at a steelworks, but the court found his specific tasks did not match the detailed list of eligible jobs in the Ministry of Internal Affairs' annexes. Consequently, the court ruled that resort orders cannot expand the scope of eligible work beyond the statutory annexes, leading to the dismissal of the claim.

Regesto Legislator

Generato dall'IA

Art. 32 ust. 1, 2 ustawy o emeryturach i rentach z Funduszu Ubezpieczeń Społecznych; Art. 393 § 1 k.p.c.: Work performed in special conditions entitling to early retirement must strictly correspond to the positions listed in the official annexes to the relevant government regulation; resort orders cannot expand this scope.

Parole chiave

Generato dall'IA
early retirement benefits special working conditions government regulation annexes social insurance institution resort order authority statutory interpretation employment status

Disposizioni normative citate

Generato dall'IA
Art. 32 ust. 1, 2 ustawy z dnia 17 grudnia 1998 r. o emeryturach i rentach z Funduszu Ubezpieczeń Społecznych
Art. 393 § 1 k.p.c.
rozporządzenie Rady Ministrów z dnia 7 lutego 1983 r. w sprawie wieku emerytalnego pracowników zatrudnionych w szczególnych warunkach lub w szczególnym charakterze
art. 93 ust. 2 Konstytucji
art. 39315 k.p.c

Giurisprudenza citata

Generato dall'IA
I UK 15/04
Wyrok z dnia 23 listopada 2004 r.
II UK 337/03
Supreme Court remands pension case to lower court regarding special work conditions verification. The court upheld the legal basis of the ministerial order defining special work conditions. The court clarified that the specific job title matters more than the work performed. The court emphasized the need for comprehensive evidence evaluation in pension disputes. The court ruled that the ministerial order remains valid despite constitutional transition periods. The court stated that the law defines special work conditions, not the order itself. The court noted that the order serves as a list of jobs, not a source of individual rights. The court found that the lower court must verify the actual work performed by the applicant. The court held that the applicant failed to prove special work conditions for early retirement.

Ti chiedi come si applica questa sentenza alla tua fattispecie?

Analizza questa decisione insieme alla legislazione federale e cantonale, ai commentari e alla giurisprudenza successiva in Legislator AI.

Apri in Legislator →

Testo completo