1. The subject of the dispute is the appeal against the actions and inaction of military units regarding the calculation and payment of indexation of monetary allowance to the plaintiff.<\/p>\n
2. The Supreme Court overturned the decisions of the courts of previous instances, which returned the statement of claim to the plaintiff, motivating this as follows:
\n * The courts did not take into account that the indexation of monetary allowance is part of the monthly payment, and not a payment upon dismissal, except for indexation for the month of dismissal.
\n * The courts did not determine the date when the plaintiff learned or should have learned about the violation of his right to receive indexation for each month of the disputed period.
\n * The courts did not take into account the employer’s (military unit) obligation to inform the employee about the components of the accrued and paid monetary allowance, as provided for in Article 110 of the Labor Code of Ukraine.
\n * The court emphasized that for the correct resolution of the issue of compliance with the term for applying to the court, it is necessary to establish whether the defendant fulfilled the obligation to inform the plaintiff about the payments, and when the plaintiff received documentary confirmation of information about the payments for each month of the disputed period.
\n * The court also noted that for indexation for the month of dismissal, it is necessary to establish the date the plaintiff received written notification of the amounts accrued and paid upon dismissal.
\n * Considering the above, the Supreme Court concluded that the courts of previous instances did not clarify all the circumstances of the case, which made it impossible to establish the factual circumstances relevant to the correct resolution of the procedural issue.
\n * The Court noted that it departs from previous conclusions regarding the application of Article 233 of the Labor Code of Ukraine as amended at the time of application to the court, emphasizing the need to take into account the periods of origin of legal relations.<\/p>\n
3. The Supreme Court ruled to overturn the decisions of the courts of previous instances and send the case for continued consideration to the court of first instance.<\/p>\n