Recently, the Supreme Court has dealt with a rather interesting issue concerning the right to family pension in the case of postgraduate studies.
Supreme Court by resolution of composition seven Supreme Court judges, dated 25 September 2019 III UZP 6/19 stated that the person who achieved 25 years of age, being at the last year of postgraduate studies, the right to family pension is extended until the end of this year of study (Article 68(2) Act dated 17 December 1998 on pensions from the Social Insurance Fund; text one: Journal of Laws of 2018, item 1270 as amended, hereinafter ‘the Pension Act’).
The concept of ‘high school studies’ and the divergence in case law
An important issue for the examination of this case in the context of the provisions entitling family pension has become the concept of a ‘studio at a higher school’.
According to Article 68(1)(2) pension laws for children who have exceeded 16 one year of age, you have the right to a survivor's pension until you graduate from school, but no longer than you reach 25 years of age.
In turn, with Article 68(2) The pension law shows that when the child reached 25 years of age, being at the last year of college, then the entitlement to family pension is extended until the end of that year of study.
The Supreme Court pointed out that in favour of the view that postgraduate studies (similar to doctoral studies) are also a kind of ‘studies in a higher school’, there are also reasons for
According to Article 68(2) a pension pension is only possible if the child entitled to a survivor’s pension reaches 25 years of age, being a senior year in high school. According to the Supreme Court, the regulation contained in this provision is an exception to the general principle, and should therefore be interpreted strictly in such a way that the concept of "studies in a higher school" should be assessed regardless of their nature, nature and duration.
The above-mentioned wording was met with a large interpretation gap in Supreme Court decisions. According to part of the caselaw [1] last year of higher education within the meaning of Article 68(2) The pension law cannot refer to postgraduate studies, since the concept of ‘higher studies’ defined under Article 2(1)(5) Act dated 27 July 2005 The law on higher education has been limited only to studies conducted by a university having the powers to conduct them, ending in obtaining a professional degree: a bachelor's degree, engineer, master's degree or other equivalent title.
Other interpretations of the concept of ‘school studies’ were adopted in the Supreme Court judgment dated 6 September 2000, II UKN 699/99 (OSNAPiUS 2002 No 5, item 127), in which the view is expressed that in this case it is all types of studies organised and conducted by a higher school (a university).
Appeal to the Law on Higher Education and Purposes
The Supreme Court disagreed with the position taken in previous rulings [2] , according to which tertiary, postgraduate and doctoral studies are different types of studies and the concept of ‘studies in higher education’ included under Article 68(2) The pension law should be narrowed down to the term ‘higher studies’ defined under Article 2(1)(5) higher education law.
According to the Supreme Court, the legislature under Article 68(2) The pension law used the phrase "last year of higher education" rather than the term "last year of higher education", while the higher school may conduct various types of studies, including postgraduate and doctoral studies. For this reason, postgraduate studies continue to be ‘high school studies’, which do not change the legal definitions of these studies laid down in the law on higher education.
Furthermore, the Supreme Court pointed out that, in favour of the view that postgraduate studies (similar to doctoral studies) are also a kind of ‘studies in a higher school’, there are also considerations of purpose.
Retirement of the right to family pension on the basis of Article 68(2) The pension law is to continue to study at the last year of higher education, regardless of previous master's degree in another direction i.e.
providing those persons under Article 68 the pension legislation of the means of subsistence at a time when, when they are studying, they cannot carry out work as a permanent source of their maintenance.
[1] Supreme Court Judgment of the Day 13 January 2006, I UK 155/05 (OSNP 2006 No 23-24, item 368), Supreme Court Judgment dated 22 January 2008, I UK 207/08 (OSNP 2009 No 5-6, item 74) and Supreme Court Judgment dated 23 November 2011, II UK 71/11 (LEX No. 1308099
[2] Supreme Court Judgment of the Day 13 January 2006, I UK 155/05 (OSNP 2006 No 23-24, item 368), Supreme Court Judgment dated 22 January 2008, I UK 207/08 (OSNP 2009 No 5-6, item 74) and Supreme Court Judgment dated 23 November 2011, II UK 71/11 (LEX No. 1308099
Author: Hanna Żołnierkiewicz
Lawyer in the Legal Department. From 2017 associated with Russell Bedford Dmowski & Partners Law Firm Sp.k. He has experience in legal services to entrepreneurs in terms of merger, division and transformation of companies, bankruptcy, restructuring and capital market law. He runs the day-to-day handling of commercial law companies, including drafting corporate documentation, both in Polish and English. He also represents clients before the general courts in economic and civil law cases.