Women lose landmark legal fight against state pension age rise - MSE News

Options
Women affected by changes to the state pension age have lost their High Court fight against the Government...
Read the full story:
'Women lose landmark legal fight against state pension age rise'
OfficialStamp.gif
Click reply below to discuss. If you haven’t already, join the forum to reply.
«13456723

Comments

  • molerat
    molerat Posts: 31,855 Forumite
    Name Dropper Photogenic First Post First Anniversary
    Options
    Oh dear, how sad, never mind :p
    Alternative headline ... Entitled Money Grabbers Lose In Court !
  • rawhammered
    Options
    And no tears were shed
  • SonOf
    SonOf Posts: 2,631 Forumite
    First Anniversary First Post
    Options
    Good that they lost. Mostly a greedy bunch of women trying to money grab for personal gain.

    They should have focused on the 2011 changes which were unfair to a small group and not focused on the 1995 changes which gave plenty of notice.
  • ArcticRoll
    Options
    Had they succeeded and the law changed, from the date of the new legislation would men born at the same time not have a case to pursue to argue that from the point the law was amended that they were victims of discrimination?

    Arguing, essentially, that moving away from a point of gender discrimination was gender discrimination was always going to be a hard sell.
  • redux
    redux Posts: 22,976 Forumite
    Name Dropper First Anniversary First Post
    Options
    Unsurprising, given that many other women equally affected thought they'd been notified well enough, and didn't see merit in this campaign.

    ... arguing that raising their pension age "unlawfully discriminated against them on the grounds of age, sex, and age and sex combined".

    Surely there is some irony in this claim. The policy change was to zero out previous discrimination in their favour, and not worse than that.

    I don't see why they've said they will appeal. From a brief reading of this, it sounds like they've presented a poor case badly, with extra detail which isn't relevant. That isn't the court's fault. Maybe they need better legal advice: when your case is weak don't bother.
  • pip895
    pip895 Posts: 1,178 Forumite
    First Anniversary First Post Combo Breaker
    Options
    I think saying that they are all Money grabbers is a little harsh - there are undoubtedly some who have been made "homeless and destitute" . Sadly there are many out there, not necessarily born in the 50s, whose financial gullibility/ineptitude has resulted in the same. The monies used on lawyers fees would have been much better spent helping them directly.
  • jem16
    jem16 Posts: 19,398 Forumite
    Name Dropper First Post First Anniversary Photogenic
    Options
    As a 50s' born woman, the right Judgment was made.

    I would have liked to see some redress for those born late 53 and all 54 as they were badly hit by the 2011 Act. However the case was badly handled.

    MMQC should retire now. He's lost his touch.
  • minislim
    minislim Posts: 357 Forumite
    First Anniversary Combo Breaker First Post
    Options
    sensible decision.

    women want equality to men. so pensions was being aligned.

    you cant have it both ways.
  • zagfles
    zagfles Posts: 20,323 Forumite
    First Anniversary Name Dropper First Post Chutzpah Haggler
    Options
    The MSE story doesn't mention the dismissal of the ridiculous claim that legislation correcting inequality was discriminatory!
    The media summary is here:
    https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/Delve-and-Glynn-v-SSWP-media-summary-v-2-002.pdf
This discussion has been closed.
Meet your Ambassadors

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 343.2K Banking & Borrowing
  • 250.1K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 449.7K Spending & Discounts
  • 235.3K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 608K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 173.1K Life & Family
  • 247.9K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 15.9K Discuss & Feedback
  • 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards