Spotlight
Court of Protection Practice 2024
'Court of Protection Practice goes from strength to strength, having...
Jackson's Matrimonial Finance Tenth Edition
Jackson's Matrimonial Finance is an authoritative specialist text...
Spotlight
Latest articlesrss feeds
Customary marriages and their recognition in England: a legal overview
Ruth Omoregie, Associate Solicitor, Anthony Gold Solicitors LLPAU OneThis article explores the complexities surrounding customary marriages, focusing on their legal recognition and the possible...
Reducing conflict in divorce and dissolution by the Divorce, Dissolution and Separation Act 2020: continuity, change or contrast?
John Haskey FAcSS AKC, University of Oxford, Department of Social Policy and InterventionThis article assesses some recently published statistics for 2022 on joint and sole notifications of...
Costs in Financial Remedy Proceedings: an overview
Jack Harris, St John’s ChambersVivien Croly, St John’s ChambersUntil relatively recently, practitioners dealing with financial remedy work were rarely troubled by the issue of costs at the conclusion...
Case management: is a listed court hearing always necessary?
Stephen Williams, St Mary’s ChambersDDJs sitting in civil work undertake a large bulk of administrative work in boxwork.  This work realistically keeps the wheels of the County Court turning....
Pregnant women and the Court of Protection – when a pregnant woman changes her mind, does she lack capacity, and how do we know where her best interests lie?
Caroline Shields, Head of Court of Protection Team, Park Square BarristersThe decisions of pregnant women are always under scrutiny. But do cultural or political views about pregnant women give...
View all articles
Authors

Equal pension rights to same-sex couples: Walker v Innospec

Sep 29, 2018, 21:39 PM
Family Law, pensions, same-sex couples, Walker v Innospec, Supreme Court
Title : Equal pension rights to same-sex couples: Walker v Innospec
Slug : equal-pension-rights-to-same-sex-couples-walker-v-innospec
Meta Keywords :
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Check Copyright Text : No
Date : Sep 27, 2017, 08:58 AM
Article ID : 115979

In Walker v Innospec Limited and others [2017] UKSC 47 the Supreme Court ruled that individuals in a civil partnership or a same-sex marriage must benefit from the same pension rights as those in an opposite-sex marriage. Pension rights that built up before 5 December 2005 had been excepted under UK law from the ban on discrimination on the grounds of sexual orientation.

The Government (and many pension lawyers) had assumed that the Supreme Court would uphold the cut-off date of 5 December 2005 for sexual orientation discrimination because the European Court had upheld a similar cut-off date (of 17 May 1990) in relation to sex discrimination. But the Supreme Court upset that assumption after a careful analysis of European law.

Family lawyers should bear this judgment in mind when advising a same-sex partner on what death benefits have been, or may be, payable from a pension scheme. They should check whether the pension scheme has unlawfully applied the 5 December 2005 cut-off date in making any payments or calculating any quotations. Individuals who have been discriminated against unlawfully following the death of their spouse or civil partner will in principle have a claim against the pension scheme.


The full version of this article will appear in the October 2017 issue of Family Law

Find out more or request a free 1-week trial of Family Law journal. Please quote: 100482.
Categories :
  • Articles
Tags :
Same_sex_couple
Authors
Provider :
Product Bucket :
Related Articles
Load more comments
Comment by from