0370 270 6000

already registered?

Please sign in with your existing account details.

need to register?

Register to access exclusive content, sign up to receive our updates and personalise your experience on brownejacobson.com.

Privacy statement - Terms and conditions

high Court finds against WASPI women

11 October 2019

The High Court has rejected the judicial review claim brought by the campaign group BackTo60 against the Department of Work and Pensions (DWP). Two claimants argued that the rise in state pension age was discriminatory on grounds of sex and/or age; because they were given insufficient time to prepare for it. As many women took time out to care for children, were paid less than men and could not save as much in a pension, the change hit them far harder than it would men.

The change was held not to be direct sex discrimination because women were not treated less favourably than men, as it equalised “a historic asymmetry”, and corrected historic discrimination against men. The change was also not held to be discriminatory on grounds of age. Even if it was, it could be justified because the decision to equalise the pension age had a legitimate purpose and foundation.

BackTo60 will continue to fight the rapid pace of the change. Some women were not aware of the change until they tried to claim their pension. Regrettably, this means many of the four million women expecting to retire at a certain age have to continue in work or manage on working age benefits (with all the conditions those benefits entail).

related opinions

Sexual Harassment in the workplace – consequences of getting it wrong

A partner at a Magic Circle law firm has this week been ordered to pay £235,000 in fines and costs by a disciplinary tribunal, having been found guilty of breaching his professional obligations.

View blog

When does misconduct by a professional amount to professional misconduct?

The Court of Appeal has considered what amounts to professional conduct for the purposes of the MHPS in the case of Idu –v- The East Suffolk & North Essex NHS Foundation Trust.
The allegations raised against the Appellant surgeon included, amongst others, refusals to follow management instructions and inappropriate (rude, uncivil, and, on occasions, aggressive) verbal and written communications.

View blog

The importance of three magic words: subject to contract

A recent case illustrates the importance of ensuring that all emails discussing the terms of a proposed acquisition are headed ‘subject to contract’.

View blog

Vegetarianism is not a philosophical belief under the Equality Act 2010

In its Judgment earlier this month, the Tribunal considered whether vegetarianism is capable of being a philosophical belief capable of protection under the Equality Act 2010.

View blog

mailing list sign up



Select which mailings you would like to receive from us.

Sign up