Landmark same-sex pension equality hearing to begin as Liberty and John Walker take fight to Supreme Court

07 March 2017

Liberty client John Walker’s landmark legal battle to secure equal pension benefits for his husband and dramatically alter the landscape of LGBT rights in the UK reaches the Supreme Court tomorrow (8 March).

The case challenges an exemption in the Equality Act that lets employers exclude same-sex partners from spousal benefits paid into a pension fund before December 2005, when civil partnerships became legal. Liberty and Mr Walker argue this exemption is discriminatory.

John Walker retired from chemicals group Innospec in 2003, having worked for the company for more than 20 years. During his time there, he made the same contributions to the pension scheme as his heterosexual colleagues.

Mr Walker and his husband have been together since 1993. They entered into a civil partnership in January 2006, having registered to do so on the first day this was made possible. This was later converted into a marriage.

Relying on the Equality Act exemption, Innospec has made clear that – should Mr Walker die – his husband will not receive the same survivor benefits he would if he were a woman. Innospec’s position is supported by the Department for Work and Pensions.

Those benefits will not include contributions Mr Walker made prior to 2005. Since Mr Walker retired in 2003, his husband will receive a pension of only a few hundred pounds a year.

If Mr Walker were married to a woman, his wife would be entitled to receive roughly £45,000 a year for the rest of her life.

Tomorrow's Supreme Court hearing is Mr Walker's last chance to ensure that, should he die first, his husband will be treated equally and be adequately provided for.

Sanctioning discrimination

The vast majority of private occupational pension schemes treat surviving same-sex spouses as equal to surviving other-sex spouses, but Innospec’s does not, instead making use of the exemption in the Equality Act.

Represented by Liberty, Mr Walker is arguing that the exemption should be disapplied because such discrimination based on sexual orientation breaches his human rights.

If he is successful, Mr Walker's challenge could dramatically change the lives of thousands of same-sex couples.

John Walker said: “The government should be ashamed that – in 2017 – I and so many others are being forced to live with the worry that our loved ones won’t be provided for when we’re gone, solely because of our sexuality.

“My husband and I have been together for 24 years. During that time, I also gave more than two decades of my life to Innospec, paying in exactly the same amount into the company pension fund as my heterosexual colleagues.

“How can it be right that my husband will get practically nothing but, if I were to divorce him and marry the very first woman I see, she would be immediately entitled to the full spousal pension? It’s not just unfair – it’s absurd.

“For as long as I can remember, successive governments have talked about creating a fairer society – but while this exemption exists, they continue to sanction discrimination and inequality.”

Emma Norton, lawyer at Liberty and acting for Mr Walker, said: “This is a clear case of discrimination. Mr Walker gave 20 years to his employer and made the same pension contributions as his heterosexual colleagues but – solely because of his sexual orientation – his husband will see nowhere near the same benefits. Many, many others will be suffering the same injustice.

“This archaic loophole has no place in the UK in 2017, and it is disgraceful that the Department for Work and Pensions continues to spend taxpayers' money fighting to preserve it. There can be no price tag on equality.

“We hope the Supreme Court will drive the law into the twenty-first century and take a huge step towards equal pension rights for same-sex spouses and civil partners.”


Contact: Liberty Press Office on 020 7378 3656 or 07973 831128

Notes to editors:

  1. Mr Walker was successful in the Employment Tribunal in 2012, but that decision was overturned in the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) in 2014 – with the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) intervening in support of Innospec. The Court of Appeal upheld the EAT’s verdict a year later.
  2. The Civil Partnership Act 2004 came into force on 5 December 2005, enabling same-sex couples for the first time to enter into a legal commitment equivalent to marriage. On the same date an exemption was created to permit employers and pension funds to exclude civil partners from spousal benefits attributable to service prior to 5 December 2005. This exemption is now contained in paragraph 18(1) of Schedule 9 of the Equality Act 2010.
  3. The Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Act 2013 now allows same-sex couples to marry. Couples who had previously entered into a civil partnership can “upgrade” to marriage. However, the Act did not remove the exemption in paragraph 18(1) of Schedule 9; rather it extended it to same-sex married couples.
  4. Traditionally, occupational pension schemes state that when a member dies his or her spouse is entitled to 50 per cent of the value of the pension for the rest of his or her life, regardless of when the couple married. Government research suggests that almost three quarters of occupational pension schemes have voluntarily extended this benefit to employees’ same-sex spouses and civil partners.
  5. The exemption in the Equality Act 2010 potentially affects any employee who:
    1. is a member of an occupational pension scheme which provides benefits for members’ spouses,
    2. has pensionable service prior to 5 December 2005, and
    3. is in a same-sex marriage or civil partnership.