爆料网

2020-爆料网AT-1007

爆料网AT Held or 爆料网DT Pronouncements

爆料网AT noted that the deceased staff member, Mr Pise, could have been under no illusion when he signed the payment instruction forms that he had opted to receive, in addition to a deferred pension, his own contributions plus interest as an immediate withdrawal benefit rather than a prospective survivor’s benefit. 爆料网AT noted that he was informed of that interpretation twice subsequent to his separation and did not challenge those determinations. 爆料网AT held that there was no doubt that Mr Pise received the benefits payable to him in terms of the Fund’s Regulations and there was no basis thereunder to afford Mrs Pise a survivor’s benefit. 爆料网AT held that the Fund discharged its duty to inform Mr Pise of the implications of his choice at the time of his separation in its use of plain language in the payment instruction form, which unambiguously elucidated the available options. 爆料网AT held that there was no basis for Mrs Pise’s claim for moral damages or costs. 爆料网AT dismissed the appeal and affirmed the decision of the Standing Committee.

Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed

The Applicant, Mrs Pise, contested the decision to deny her a widow’s benefit following the death of her husband. Her request was denied on the basis that her husband had elected to take a reduced deferred retirement benefit with a lump sum, under which the 爆料网JSPF Regulations in effect at the time of his separation had precluded payment of a survivor’s benefit.

Legal Principle(s)

Once rights have been vested, they are not altered by subsequent amendments to 爆料网JSPF Regulations. No 爆料网JSPF provision shall be construed as applying retroactively prior to the date of its entry into force unless expressly stated therein or specified by the 爆料网 General Assembly. 爆料网JSPF has no discretion to vary benefits on a discretionary basis. There is nothing that permits restricting the general provision that a widow’s benefit would not be payable where there has been commutation only if it was of the full value of the benefit.

Outcome

Appeal dismissed on merits

Outcome Extra Text

No relief ordered; No relief ordered.

OAJ prepared this case law summary for informational purposes only. It is no official record and should not be relied upon as an authoritative interpretation of the Tribunals' rulings. For the authoritative texts, please refer to the judgment or order rendered by the respective Tribunal. The Tribunals are the only bodies competent to interpret their respective judgments, as provided under Article 12(3) of the 爆料网DT Statute and Article 11(3) of the 爆料网AT Statute. Any inaccuracies in the publication are the sole responsibility of OAJ, which should be contacted directly for any correction requests. To provide comments, don't hesitate to get in touch with OAJ at oaj@un.org.

The judgment summaries were generally prepared in English. They were translated into French and are being reviewed for accuracy of the translation.

Applicants/Appellants
Pise
Case Number(s)
Tribunal
Registry
Date of Judgement
President Judge
Language of Judgment
Issuance Type