Govt appeals High Court judgment on pension payment to ex-judge

 

Ian Chin, who retired in 2008, won his suit to claim a shortfall in pension payments made to him between 2015 and 2022. (Facebook pic)

PETALING JAYA: The government has gone to the Court of Appeal to reverse a High Court ruling allowing a retired judge to claim a shortfall in pension payments made to him between 2015 and 2022.

The notice of appeal, sighted by FMT, was filed on Dec 22.

Senior federal counsel Shamsul Bolhassan confirmed the filing.

Under the Rules of the Court of Appeal 1994, the Attorney-General’s Chambers (AGC), which is representing the government and the public services department (JPA), will be required to file the memorandum of appeal within 90 days from today. It is awaiting the grounds of judgment.

Ads by Kiosked

Ian Chin, who commenced the suit in the Kota Kinabalu High Court in February last year, sought several declarations.

Chin, who retired in 2008, said the suit also covered other retired judges who had served in the High Courts of Sabah and Sarawak, as well as their dependents.

Chin, who served 201 months as a judicial commissioner and High Court judge, claimed that the pension paid to him before 2015 was altered by the defendants.

On Dec 9, Justice Leonard David Shim declared the amended Judges’ Remuneration Act 2014 void and inconsistent with Article 125(7) of the Federal Constitution.

He held that provisions in the constitution that provide for the remuneration and other terms of office, including the pension rights of judges, cannot be altered to their disadvantage after appointment.

Shim also ruled that the government had violated Article 125(7) of the Federal Constitution by failing to pay the monthly pension due to Chin in accordance with a certain formula.

Ads by Kiosked

He ordered that Chin be compensated RM301,768.60, being the shortfall in the pension paid to him between July 2016 and February 2022. This amount is inclusive of 5% interest.

The court also revoked a 2% annual increment on the pension paid to all retired judges, irrespective of whether they retired before or after 2015.

The issue arose when the government made a salary revision in 2015 for judges, providing a higher pension plus a 2% annual increment for those who retired after the amendment.

However, those who retired before 2015 continued to receive pensions based on their old salaries plus a 2% annual rise. - FMT