45. On September 19, 1986, the Office of the Chief Legal Counsel of the Nation issued an advisory opinion in which he found that the claims should be denied.58 The Office of the Chief Legal Counsel argued as follows: (…) the circumstance that Circular 5/77 of the General Secretariat (…) has determined a restrictive criterion on the subject of recognition of earnings without services rendered, imposes limiting it [the criterion] to the instances in which there exists an express provision of law.59 46. On March 19, 1987, the General Director of the DGI issued Resolution No. 75/87 denying the request of Mrs. Perrone, which was filed in April 1983.60 In said resolution, it specified that only her employee benefit rights could be recognized and, therefore, she must obtain a solution before the Union of Employee Benefits (Caja de Previsión).61 47. For its part, on December 17, 1987, the Ministry of Economy issued Resolution No. 1217 denying Mr. Preckel’s request.62 The Ministry noted that the General Directorate of Legal Affairs of the Ministry found that the claim was appropriate.63 It argued, however, that the Chief Counsel of the Nation issued a ruling in an analogous case to the this one – in reference to the case of Mrs. Perrone –finding that it was not viable to pay wages lost during the time that they did not show up to work.64 2. Judicial Proceedings 48. On June 24, 1988, Mrs. Perrone and Mr. Preckel filed complaints, respectively, with a federal judge against the National State – General Tax Directorate.65 49. The complaints are based on Article 14.c of the Rules on Leaves of Absence, Justifications and Exemptions of the National Public Administration - Decree 3413 of 1979.66 Said provision establishes the following: Art. 14. Agents are entitled to justification of absences with payment of wages when it is for the following reasons, and with the limitations established in each instance: c) Special reasons: Absences caused by meteorological phenomena and cases of duly proven force majeure.67 58 Advisory opinion of the Office of the Chief Counsel of the Nation, September 19, 1986. Administrative investigation proceedings. Annex to the initial petition on Elba Clotilde Perrone. 59 Advisory opinion of the Office of the Chief Counsel of the Nation, September 19, 1986. Administrative investigation proceedings. Annex to the initial petition on Elba Clotilde Perrone. 60 Resolution No. 75/87 of the Director General of the DGI, March 19, 1987. Administrative investigation proceedings. Annex to the initial petition on Elba Clotilde Perrone. 61 Resolution No. 75/87 of the Director General of the DGI, March 19, 1987. Administrative investigation proceedings. Annex to the initial petition on Elba Clotilde Perrone. 62 Resolution No. 1217 of the Ministry of Economy, December 17, 1987. Administrative investigation proceedings. Annex to the initial petition on Juan Preckel. 63 Resolution No. 1217 of the Ministry of Economy, December 17, 1987. Administrative investigation proceedings. Annex to the initial petition on Juan Preckel. 64 Resolution No. 1217 of the Ministry of Economy, December 17, 1987. Administrative investigation proceedings. Annex to the initial petition on Juan Preckel. 65 Complaint before federal judge, June 24, 1988. Judicial proceedings. Annex to initial petition on Elba Clotilde Perrone. Complaint before federal judge, June 24, 1988. Judicial proceedings. Annex to initial petition on Juan Preckel. 66 Complaint before federal judge, June 24, 1988. Judicial proceedings. Annex to initial petition on Elba Clotilde Perrone. Complaint before federal judge, June 24, 1988. Judicial proceedings. Annex to initial petition on Juan Preckel. 9