Former public servant loses super reinstatement claim

18 July 2013
| By Mike |
image
image
expand image

The Federal Court has upheld decisions by the Superannuation Complaints Tribunal (SCT) and the Commonwealth Superannuation Scheme denying the reinstatement of superannuation rights to a public servant who left the Australian Public Service and then rejoined around five years later.

A report in The Canberra Times said the former public servant, Patricia Anne Ludowyk, surrendered her super rights in favour of a $15,166.53 payout from the Commonwealth Superannuation Scheme (CSS) after she quit a 17-year career with the Department of Veterans Affairs in 1988, using the cash to buy an investment property she still owns.

She rejoined the public service in 1993 with a position at AusAid and was admitted to the Public Sector Superannuation Scheme. Three years later she attempted to reverse the payout and regain her surrendered entitlements, claiming she did not realise the benefits of preserving her rights or the implications of not having substantial superannuation on retirement.

Ludowyk argued she had not been provided with enough information to make an informed decision when she opted to take the cash payout, but her applications to the CSS and SCT over the past 16 years were repeatedly been dismissed on the basis she had consciously chosen the refund option for her super and had done so because it suited her plans to invest in real estate.

The Canberra Times reported she then took the fight to the Federal Court, arguing the tribunal had made an error of law by not applying its own value judgment to her application and had not taken into account new evidence.

However Federal Court judge, Justice Lindsay Foster, this week published a judgement in which he said Ludowyk had failed to prove either of her claims and dismissed the case.

The report said Justice Foster had noted the now-retired public servant was ‘'obviously not a person who is incapable of absorbing information of the kind relevant to the decision which she made in the present case, or to assess which option she might take in light of that information''.

‘'She has a PhD from the ANU and has occupied positions of some significance in the Australian Public Service during her period of employment with that Service,'' Justice Foster's judgement said.

Read more about:

AUTHOR

Recommended for you

sub-bgsidebar subscription

Never miss the latest developments in Super Review! Anytime, Anywhere!

Grant Banner

From my perspective, 40- 50% of people are likely going to be deeply unhappy about how long they actually live. ...

11 months ago
Kevin Gorman

Super director remuneration ...

11 months 1 week ago
Anthony Asher

No doubt true, but most of it is still because over 45’s have been upgrading their houses with 30 year mortgages. Money ...

11 months 1 week ago

Jim Chalmers has defended changes to the Future Fund’s mandate, referring to himself as a “big supporter” of the sovereign wealth fund, amid fierce opposition from the Co...

1 day 11 hours ago

Demand from institutional investors was the main driver of growth in Australia’s responsible investment (RI) market in 2023, as the industry continued to gain momentum....

1 day 11 hours ago

In a new review of the country’s largest fund, a research house says it’s well placed to deliver attractive returns despite challenges....

1 day 12 hours ago