THE MAIN FACTORS THAT LEAD TO THE MISUSE OF SUBSTANTIATIVE LAW REGARDING THE RETIREMENT REQUESTS WITH FOREIGN ELEMENTS

Abstract

It is known that there are many unsolved problems which make it difficult to resolve requests for retirement with a foreign element, where in principle the main consequences are borne only by people who have met the requirements for retirement. This explicitly refers to people who have insurance and come from  the  former Yugoslav Republics of Slovenia and Croatia, as well as those who live in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Therefore, prob- lems occur when different interpretations of regulations happen, especially when it comes down to the Agreement between the states, which is a particular problem in Slovenia and Croatia, where the officials of the two signatory countries have different interpretations of the Agreement, which leads to its misapplication.

The aim of this paper is to prove that the operation of the Agreement in this manner is not in favor of the insured people, which creates enforcement problems even to the officials of both signatory countries. Since the key articles of the Agreement have been interpreted in many different ways, the result of this leads to interpreting and applying differently arranged conditions for retirement, with an international or foreign element. There is an account base variously defined for calculating pensions, as well as different ways of recalculating the pensions acting ex officio in accordance with the Article 37 of the Agreement.

The solution to all these problems is the correction of factors underpinning the whole activity, such as: man, agreement, court interpreter thus avoid incomplete and incorrect fact-finding as well as the misuse of material rights. Namely, if court interpreters were to participate and work in regulatory activities with an international or foreign element, prior to their adoption and implementation, as well as during the work of authorities that would act upon them, there would not be any incorrectly specified or irregular state of facts as to the misuse of substantive law.