Latest update May 20th, 2024 12:59 AM
Dec 27, 2023 Court Stories, Features / Columnists, News
Kaieteur News – An appeal has been filed by the office of the Attorney General to challenge the ruling in which the National Insurance Scheme (NIS) was ordered to pay a pensioner his full benefits.
Last month, High Court Justice Damone Younge ordered the NIS to pay a former staffer of Toolsie Persaud Limited (TPL), Shariff Zainul his full benefits. The ruling was made after Zainul was able to prove to the court that he worked with the company for several years and that the contributions were deducted from his salary.
High Court ordered the NIS to credit Zainul 354 contributions which his former employer, TPL, failed to remit to NIS while he worked there from 1992 to 2000. The NIS was also ordered to pay Zainul his NIS Pension effective October 16, 2011, to the date of his 60th birthday.
However, the Government of Guyana through the NIS and the office of the Attorney General is challenging Mr. Zainul’s right to his old pension in the circumstances of the court decision.
In the appeal, the NIS is contending that the judge erred and misdirected herself in law in her interpretation of the provisions of the NIS Social Security Act Chapter 36:01 and its regulations.
The appeal is also challenging the decision on the ground that Justice Younge erred or misdirected herself in the application of Section 17 (1) C of the NIS and Social Security Contribution Regulations and failed to apply the provision of Section 45 of the principal Act which provides the many legal remedies and recourse of the respondent/applicant as an insured person /employee; the judge erred and misdirected herself in law in applying and giving precedence to Regulation 6 (1) of NIS and social security contributions, regulations ahead of and in priority with the principal Act.
Further, addressing the merits of the case, the NIS contends inter alia, that the judge erred when she determined that Mr. Zainul was entitled to be accredited 354 contributions for the period for which the employer, Toolsie Persaud Limited, failed to remit the contributions to NIS on the basis that the man provided the proof of employment and should not be made to suffer because his employer failed to pay the requisite contributions.
In a ruling dated November 27, Justice Younge pointed out that “The applicant [Zainul] should not be made to suffer for failure of the respondent [NIS] and TPL to reconcile their records or to have an accurate record of the contributions made by the applicant, for the failure of TPL to pay over the applicant’s contributions made by the applicant, or for the failure of TPL to pay over the applicant’s contributions to the respondent,”
In court documents, Zainul had stated that on attaining the age of 60, he made an application to the NIS for the payment of his pension and was informed by the insurance entity that he did not qualify to be paid a pension because he did not have sufficient contributions.
Zainul was then informed that there was no record of any contributions for him for the period 1992 to 2000 and that he had amassed only 374 contributions which entitled him to the payment of an Old Age Grant but not his pension.
The man subsequently appealed to the Appeal tribunal against NIS’ decision not to pay him. He was advised to procure testimonies from two of his former work colleagues who worked with him during the period of his employment that could not be accounted for by NIS.
The Applicant obtained a letter from the former Personnel Officer of TPL, Krishendatt Sahadeo, and statutory declarations from two former employees of the company, Surujpaul Danpaul, and Kenneth Gordon, attesting to the fact that he was an employee for the years in question.
He also presented pay slips from TPL evidencing NIS deductions for the years 1993, 1994, 1995, 1996, 1997, and 1998 were also submitted.
However, the man was still told that his appeal was unsuccessful. As a result, he hired attorney Christopher Thompson from the law firm Christopher Ram and Associates to take the matter to court.
Alluding to the evidence, the Court noted that former Personnel Officer at TPL, Krishendatt Sahadeo substantiating that Zainul worked with the company from May 4, 1992, to December 31, 2000, is “good and sufficient proof of his employment there.”
As such, Justice Younge noted that in the court’s considered view, contribution schedules should by no means take ‘precedence’ over later documents to the exclusion of those later documents. The respondent is required to consider all documents put before it before coming to a decision on the calculation of an insured person’s contributions and his or her entitlement to pension benefits under the Act.
The judge stated too that statutory declarations dated May 7, 2019, and attributed to Surjupaul Danpaul and Kenneth Gordon “attesting” that the man worked there from 1992 to 2000 were also “good and sufficient evidence” that Zainul worked with the company.
In his evidence before the court, Zainul also produced pay slips from TPL showing NIS deductions for 1993, 1994, 1995, 1996, 1997, and 1998 to the NIS tribunal but was informed orally that his appeal was still unsuccessful.
As such, Justice Younge ordered that Zainul be paid his pension with interest on his arrears of pension at a rate of 6 percent per annum from October 16, 2011, the date of his 60th birthday, to November 27, 2023, the date of judgment, and thereafter 4 percent per annum until fully paid. The court said that the sums received by Zainul as grants must be deducted from the arrears of pension.
Listen what Ring Fencing means to your foot table!
May 20, 2024
(CWI) – The Cricket West Indies (CWI) Selection Panel has announced the squad for the upcoming T20 International (T20I) Series against South Africa. This significant series, preceding the ICC...Peeping Tom… Kaieteur News – The media in Guyana stands at a crossroads. The path it chooses will have significant... more
By Sir Ronald Sanders Kaieteur News – After 13 years, the 14 independent member states of the Caribbean Community (CARICOM)... more
Freedom of speech is our core value at Kaieteur News. If the letter/e-mail you sent was not published, and you believe that its contents were not libellous, let us know, please contact us by phone or email.
Feel free to send us your comments and/or criticisms.
Contact: 624-6456; 225-8452; 225-8458; 225-8463; 225-8465; 225-8473 or 225-8491.
Or by Email: [email protected] / [email protected]