The case concerns the suspension of old-age pension payments to Ms. Natalia Marushchak, a Ukrainian national who worked as editor-in-chief of a municipal newspaper while receiving a pension calculated under the Civil Service Act. The suspension occurred between April 2015 and April 2016 due to amendments to pension legislation.The Court found that while the suspension of pension payments from April to May 2015 was lawful and justified, the continued suspension from June 2015 to April 2016 violated Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention. This was because the legal basis for suspension ceased to exist after June 1, 2015, when the expected special legislation was not enacted.The key provisions of the decision include:
- The Court rejected the government’s argument about the six-month rule, stating that the applicant made proper use of domestic remedies
- The suspension of pension for April-May 2015 was found legitimate as it served the general interest of protecting public finances
- The continued suspension after June 1, 2015, was deemed unlawful as it lacked proper legal basis
- The Court awarded the applicant EUR 4,000 in compensation for all damages
The most significant aspects of this decision are the Court’s distinction between two periods of pension suspension and its finding that the continuation of suspension without proper legal basis constitutes a violation of property rights. The Court also confirmed that while states have wide discretion in implementing social policies, such measures must maintain a proper legal basis throughout their implementation.
