PUTRAJAYA: The Court of Appeal today upheld a High Court ruling allowing a retired judge to claim a shortfall in pension payments paid to him between 2015 and 2022.
In the 2-1 majority decision delivered online, a three-man bench comprising Justices Datuk P. Ravinthran, Datuk Azimah Omar and Datuk Lim Chong Fong dismissed appeals brought by the government and the Public Service Department (PSD).
The government and PSD were appealing against the Kota Kinabalu High Court’s Dec 9, 2022 decision to allow the originating summons filed by Datuk Ian Chin Hon Chong and declare the amended Judges’ Remuneration Act 2014 void and inconsistent with Article 125 (7) of the Federal Constitution.
Judges Ravinthran and Azimah dismissed the government and PSD’s appeals while Justice Lim dissented.
SPONSORED CONTENT Electrifying windows of opportunity in Sabah - The right policies, collaborations, and strategies can turn emerging opportunities into victories for all parties in Sabah. CHIEF Minister Datuk Seri Panglima Hajiji Noor’s 2021 Hala Tuju Sabah Maju Jaya Plan and the Sabah Economic Development and Investment Authority (SEDIA) have laid out a road map to an exciting future for all Sabahans, with a target of increasing Sabah’s income levels and GDP per capita from about RM 23,000 to about RM 40,000 by 2030. Read more Justice Ravinthran said he is of the same opinion with the High Court judge that the pension adjustment is part and parcel of pension rights as envisaged in Article 125 (7) of the Federal Constitution.
Justice Ravinthran, who read the broad grounds, said the law has not only entitled a judge to a pension under Article 125 (7) but has also provided for advantages for upward adjustment in the Judges Remuneration Act 2014.
He said he found no merit in the senior federal counsel’s argument that a pension adjustment is a form of additional benefit that is not a vested right.
He also said pension rights are constitutional protection accorded under Article 125 (4) and Article 79 of the Federal Constitution, adding that the amendment to the Judges’ Remuneration Act runs contrary to Article 125(7) and (9) of the Constitution.
Justice Ravinthran said the Court of Appeal is bound by the Federal Court decision in a case brought by Aminah Ahmad and 56 retired civil servants against the government which dealt with similar amending law and a similar constitutional protection in respect of civil servants.
On June 27 last year, the Federal Court decided that a 2013 amendment to the pension law was null and void. The top court ruled that Section 3 (2) of the Pensions Adjustment (Amendment) Act which came into effect in 2013 had put retired civil servants in a “less favourable situation” concerning their entitlement to increments in their pension.
In his minority decision, Lim said the Judges’ Remuneration (Amendment) Act 2014 cannot be struck down or declared void for violating Article 125 (7) and (9) of the Constitution.
He also said the appellate court is not bound by the Federal Court’s decision in Aminah’s case as Aminah’s case dealt with Article 147 of the Constitution which applies only to public servants.
Chin, who retired in 2008, filed an originating summons in the Kota Kinabalu High Court in 2022, seeking several declarations.
On Dec 9, 2022, the High Court in Kota Kinabalu declared the amended Judges’ Remuneration Act 2014 void and inconsistent with Article 125 (7) of the Constitution.
The High Court ordered that Chin be compensated RM301,768.60 being the shortfall in the pension paid to him between July 2015 and February 2022. The amount is inclusive of 5 per cent interest.
Senior Federal Counsel Shamsul Bolhassan, Liew Horng Bin and M. Kogilambigai appeared for the government and PSD while Chin represented himself and was assisted by his son Arthur.
* Follow us on Instagram and join our Telegram and/or WhatsApp channel(s) for the latest news you don't want to miss.
* Do you have access to the Daily Express e-paper and online exclusive news? Check out subscription plans available.
