The Federal Supreme Court overturned a ruling dismissing the case of an employee claiming end-of-service indemnity, who decided to refer his case to the Court of Appeal for further consideration, based on the appeal judgment on a law not applicable to his case.
In detail, a person filed a lawsuit against his employer, claiming his entitlement to end-of-service indemnity for 19 years under Article 31 of Federal Law No. 8 of 1984 concerning pensions and gratuities.
The Court of First Instance dismissed the case and was upheld by the Court of Appeal.
The employee's defense said that "the appellate judgment erred in the application of the law as it was based on the decision No. 12 of 2012 amending the provisions of Decree Law No. 9 of 2007 on pensions and gratuity of retirement while" The law applicable to the facts of the dispute is Law No. 8 of 1984 on Pensions and pensions.
The Federal Supreme Court upheld the employee's appeal, stating that it is to be decided in this court that the origin is the direct effect of the new law and its non-retroactivity affecting the rights and centers established and completed under a previous law governing all the facts and legal centers that were completed under it. The provisions of an old law to control the facts and centers completed under the application of a subsequent law, and it is not permissible if a new law to go back to the past to govern centers produced in accordance with the provisions of an old law.
She pointed out that the appeal ruling in favor of the first instance judgment in accordance with the decision No. 12 of 2012 on the amendment of some provisions of Decree Federal Law No. 9 of 2007 on pensions and gratuity for employees of the work of the plaintiff, while the fact of termination of the plaintiff's service under the application of Law No. 8 For the year 1984, in respect of retirement pensions and remunerations and its amendments, this law shall govern the facts of the dispute.