Bonus of relocation granted by AJOFM. Suspension of the right to the relocation bonus during the parental leave. Illegality. Cumulation of the relocation bonus and the child raising indemnity

DREPT ADMINISTRATIV

Abstract

For the suspension of the payment of the relocation bonus, as a measure restricting a right recognized by an individual administrative act, it is necessary to have a clear and predictable rule providing for such a restriction in cases such as claimant’s. However, the legal provisions do not include rules governing the interruption / suspension of the monthly payment of the relocation bonus granted to the beneficiary during the period of  suspension of the individual employment contract upon request of the employee, following the approval of parental leave. Essential for the confirmation of the right to the relocation bonus is the hiring of the person registered as unemployed, not obtaining monthly income from salaries and similar to salaries. However, claimant was hired under the individual employment contract,  which, although suspended, was still in force. By suspending the individual employment contract during the parental leave, claimant did not lose the capacity as employee therefore defendant’s denial of the relocation bonus is groundless. By applying the principle of interpretation ubi lex non distinguit, nec nos distinguere  debemus (where the law does not distinguish, neither should we distinguish), the child paternal leave indemnity is an income used to calculate the family monthly net income, pursuant to Art. 762 para. 2 of Law 76/2002 and Art. 463 para. (5) of GD 174/2002, irrespective whether said income was obtained by the beneficiary of the relocation bonus or another family member.