Elizabeth Ovey

This Practice Note covers the statutory framework for age discrimination and explains the distinction between direct and indirect discrimination and the requirement for a comparator. This Practice Note also considers the extent to which the age discrimination framework applies to pensions, including what statutory exceptions are in place, the consequences of age discrimination and the impact of the abolition of the default retirement age.

There are three categories of pension exceptions that have been worked into the statutory framework for age discrimination: exceptions relating to length of service, exceptions that apply to occupational pension schemes and exceptions that apply to personal pension schemes. This Practice Note looks into these exceptions. In particular, it considers the legal status of those exceptions and explains what each exception is.

This Practice Note explains the basic sex equalisation principles imposed by European law and how these were brought into domestic pensions law via the Barber case. This Practice Note also looks into the practical implications of the Barber case and other later equalisation cases, including Ten Oever, Coloroll, Trustee Solutions v Dubery, Hodgson v Toray Textiles, Bestrustees v Stuart, Harland & Wolff Pension Trustees v Aon Consulting Financial Services, and Safeway v Newton.

This Practice Note covers the equalisation issues surrounding guaranteed minimum pensions (GMPs), including the intrinsic inequality of GMPs, the position taken by the government and the High Court in the case Lloyds Banking Group Pensions Trustees Limited v Lloyds Bank plc, the way in which arguments against GMP equalisation were addressed, the legislative problems surrounding GMP equalisation, pre-Lloyds case law, the possible GMP equalisation methods, the approach taken for public sector schemes and schemes in the Pension Protection Fund.

This Practice Note considers the courts’ approach to certain sex equalisation / Barber issues involving mixed retirement ages, non-compliance with the terms of the power of amendment and contractual promises made outside a pension scheme. The cases considered include Trustee Solutions v Dubery (also known as Cripps v Trustee Solutions), Foster Wheeler v Hanley, BESTrustees v Stuart, Capital Cranfield Trustees v Beck, Premier Foods Group Services v RHM Pension Trust, HR Trustees v Wembley, Re Sea Containers (in liquidation), Smith v Avdel Systems, Harland & Wolff Pension Trustees v Aon Consulting Financial Services, Safeway v Newton, and Archer v Travis Perkins.

This Practice Note considers pension discrimination issues relating to fixed-term employees under the Fixed-term Employees (Prevention of Less Favourable Treatment) Regulations 2002, including the persons to whom the Regulations apply, how the Regulations operate and how employees can enforce their rights.

This Practice Note explains the circumstances in which a provision, criterion or practice (PCP) that is indirectly discriminatory can be objectively justified. In particular, this Practice Note looks at the legislative framework for objective justification, statutory guidance produced by the Commission for Equality and Human Rights and the approach adopted by courts in cases such as MacCulloch v Imperial Chemical Industries, Seldon v Clarkson Wright & Jakes, R (Age UK) v Secretary of State for BIS, Homer v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire Police, Oxer-Patey v Metropolitan Police Commissioner, McCloud v Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice, and Sargeant v London Fire and Emergency Planning Authority.

This Practice Note considers some of the key cases on the principle of objective justification for direct and indirect discrimination. The relevant cases include Bilka-Kaufhaus GmbH v Weber von Hartz, Trustees of Uppingham School v Shillcock, Cross v British Airways, Woodcock v Cumbria Primary Care Trust, MacCulloch v Imperial Chemical Industries, the Heydey case, Seldon v Clarkson Wright & Jakes, Homer v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire Police and Ministry of Justice v O’Brien.

This Practice Note discusses the key cases in which the courts have been concerned with claims based on the Part-time Workers (Prevention of Less Favourable Treatment) Regulations 2000 or the underlying European Directive, ie with issues as between part-time and full-time workers, whatever the gender of the workers concerned. This Practice Note also discusses the key cases in which the courts have been concerned with claims based on the Fixed-term Workers (Prevention of Less Favourable Treatment) Regulations 2002 or the underlying European Directive, ie with issues as between fixed-term and permanent workers.

This Practice Note considers pension discrimination issues relating to part-time workers, including in terms of establishing indirect discrimination, retrospective membership issues and applicable time limits. This Practice Note also looks at the impact of the Part-time Workers (Prevention of Less Favourable Treatment) Regulations 2000, SI 2000/1551.

This Practice Note looks at the legal framework for protection against sex discrimination in the context of pension schemes as developed by the EU, the UK and caselaw (eg Barber v Guardian Royal Exchange, Ten Oever, Bilka-Kaufhaus v Weber, Preston v Wolverhampton, Safeway v Newton). This Practice Note also looks at the pension areas affected by equal treatment requirements and the distinction between direct and indirect discrimination.

This Practice Note considers the key sex discrimination cases in the context of pension schemes, including Bilka-Kaufhaus v Weber von Hartz, Barber v Guardian Royal Exchange, Birds Eye Walls v Roberts, Ten Oever, Coloroll Pension Trustees v Russell, Vroege v NCIV Instituut voor Vollshuisvesting BV, Preston v Wolverhampton Healthcare NHS Trust, Harland & Wolff Pension Trustees v Aon Consulting Financial Services, and Safeway v Newton.

This Practice Note covers the judicial pension scheme established by the Judicial Pensions and Retirement Act 1993 (known as the Judicial Pension Scheme 1993 (JPS 1993) or JUPRA), including the statutory framework, governance, eligibility, contributions, retirement benefits, lump sum death benefits, survivor’s benefits, and other matters such as pension increases and transfers. Although this Practice Note is concerned principally with the JPS 1993, some reference is also made to the Judicial Pension Scheme 1981.

This Practice Note covers the statutory framework governing the Judicial Pension Scheme 2015 (JPS 2015) as well as its governance, eligibility requirements, contribution levels and benefit features, and other matters such as pension increases and transfers.

This Practice Note considers the implications of the Association belge des Consommateurs Test-Achats v Conseil des Ministres case (the Test-Achats case) and EU law on the use of sex-based actuarial factors in insurance products and occupational pension schemes.