Legislator Rechtsprechung & Gesetzgebung
DE FR IT EN
In Legislator analysieren
I 2017 76 • VG SZ I 2017 76 KI-generiert

Pension Fund Benefit Reduction Notice Dispute

Geschäftsnummer I 2017 76
Gericht / Behörde
Rechtsordnung Schweiz · Kanton Schwyz (CH-SZ)
Entscheiddatum
Originalquelle öffnen Entscheidsuche-Spiegel Maschinenlesbares Markdown (.md)

Legislator-Zusammenfassung

KI-generiert

A plaintiff sought to enforce a claim for occupational pension benefits against a pension fund following the termination of employment, arguing that the required notice period for benefit reduction had not been observed. The court determined that the contractual agreement for the pension plan, which included a provision for benefit reduction upon termination, was valid and the statutory notice requirement for such a reduction, as stipulated in the relevant legislation, was indeed met, leading to the dismissal of the plaintiff's appeal against the rejection of their claim for full benefits.

Legislator-Regeste

KI-generiert

Pension Fund Benefit Reduction Notice Dispute: The court determined that the contractual agreement for the pension plan, which included a provision for benefit reduction upon termination, was valid and the statutory notice requirement for such a reduction, as stipulated in the relevant legislation, was indeed met, leading to the dismissal of the plaintiff's appeal against the rejection of their claim for full benefits.

Schlagwörter

KI-generiert
Einstellung der Rente Leistungskürzung Pensionsfonds Kündigungsfrist Vorsorgeleistung Verteilungsplan der beruflichen Vorsorge Berufliche Vorsorge | Berufliche Vorsorge (mit med. SV)
KI-generiert
I 2018 112
Occupational Pension Benefit Dispute
II 2020 40
Pension Deferral Notification Requirement Dispute
I 2016 83
Pension Fund Disability Benefit Calculation Dispute
II 2018 107
Pension Institution v. Employer: Recovery of Unpaid Pension Contributions
II 2019 91
Pension Fund v. Employer: Occupational Pension Contributions Dispute

Fragen Sie sich, wie dieser Entscheid auf Ihren Fall anwendbar ist?

Prüfen Sie diesen Entscheid zusammen mit Bundesrecht, kantonalen Erlassen, Kommentaren und Folgeentscheiden in Legislator AI.

Fall in Legislator öffnen →

Volltext

\n \n \n \n \n

\n\n| | | |\n I 2017 76 |\n |\n \n\n

\n \n \n \n \n

\n\n| | | |\n |\n Entscheid vom 20. Juni 2018 |\n \n\n

\n \n \n \n \n \n

\n\n| | | |\n Besetzung |\n lic.iur. Achilles Humbel, Präsident |\n \n|\n |\n Dr.med. Bernhard Zumsteg, Richter Dr.med. Pierre Lichtenhahn, Richter |\n \n|\n |\n MLaw Stefan Getzmann, Gerichtsschreiber |\n \n\n

\n \n \n \n \n \n

\n\n| | | |\n Parteien |\n A.________, \n Kläger, \n vertreten durch Rechtsanwalt Dr.iur. S.________, |\n \n|\n |\n gegen |\n \n|\n |\n B.________ (Pensionskasse), \n Beklagte, |\n \n\n

\n \n \n \n \n \n

\n\n| | | |\n Gegenstand |\n Berufliche Vorsorge |\n \n\n

\n \n

Sachverhalt: