EAT upholds legislation allowing less favourable pension provision to civil partners than to married couples

18/02/14

John Walker worked for Innospec for 23 years and entered into a civil partnership in 2006. Innospec’s pension scheme provides a pension to the spouses of deceased members. It does not provide the same pension to civil partners, except in respect of benefits accrued after the Civil Partnership Act came into force in 2005. As a result, in the event of Mr Walker's death, the Innospec scheme will pay his civil partner about 1% of the benefits it would provide to his widow, had he married a woman.

The Employment Tribunal had found that such a difference in treatment – which is ostensibly permitted by Paragraph 18(1) of Schedule 9 to the Equality Act 2010 – contravened EU law, in particular Directive 2000/78/EC; and held that it was possible to read paragraph 18(1) of Schedule 9 compatibly with that law so as to remove the unlawful discrimination.

The EAT agreed that Innospec’s treatment of Mr Walker amounted to direct discrimination on the ground of sexual orientation, but accepted the submissions of the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, intervening, that discrimination in respect of benefits accrued before the Directive came into force did not contravene EU law.  The EAT rejected Mr Walker’s submissions that such a conclusion would be incompatible with two decisions of the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Justice (Maruko and Römer).

The judgment is here.