The Commission considered a complaint as to the UK government’s failure to pay an uprated pension to an applicant who had emigrated to South Africa. The Commission rejected as manifestly ill-founded the applicant’s complaint that the failure to pay the uprate infringed Article 1P. It also held that there was no violation of Article 14 read with Article 1P, saying ‘The Commission recalls that it has previously held that, although Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 does not, as such, guarantee a right to a pension, the right to benefit from a Social Security system to which a person has contributed may, in some circumstances, be a property right protected by it . . However, the Commission has also held that Article 1 does not guarantee a right to a pension of a particular amount, but that the right safeguarded by Article 1 consists, at most, ‘in being entitled as a beneficiary of the social insurance scheme to any payments made by the fund’ . . in accordance with domestic legal requirements . . Further, the Commission has held that the ‘freezing’ of a pension at a particular level when a person leaves the United Kingdom does not amount to a deprivation of possessions infringing Article 1 of the Protocol…’
Citations:
11271/84
Cited by:
Cited – Regina (Annette Carson) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions Admn 22-May-2002
The claimant received a UK state pension. She lived in South Africa, and challenged the exclusion of foreign resident pensioners from the annual uprating of pension benefits. She asserted that the state pension, or its uprating, were pecuniary . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Human Rights
Updated: 12 May 2022; Ref: scu.180998
