A landmark same-sex pension equality case will begin in the Supreme Court tomorrow, 8 March, to decide whether a man can secure the same pension benefits for his husband as he could secure if he were married to a woman.

John Walker was given permission to appeal in the Supreme Court in August 2016 after the Court of Appeal ruled against him in 2015. If the Supreme Court rules in his favour it could dramatically alter the landscape of LGBT rights in the UK.

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.

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. 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 Walker die first – 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 Walker made prior to 2005. As he retired in 2003, his husband will receive a pension of only a few hundred pounds a year. However, if he were married to a woman, his wife would be entitled to receive roughly £45,000 a year for the rest of her life.

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

Commenting on the case, Liberty lawyer acting for Walker, Emma Norton 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.”

In addition, Walker added that the government should be ashamed that so many people are being forced to live with the worry that their loved ones won’t be provided for when they are gone, solely because of their 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.”

Share Story: