Richards v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (Social Policy): ECJ 27 Apr 2006

Ms Richards, previously a married male, had undergone gender re-assignment surgery. She remained married thereafter. Ms Richards applied to the DWP for a pension from the age of 60. That was refused by the Secretary of State for the Department of Work and Pensions (‘SSWP’), so Ms Richards appealed to a Social Security Commissioner. In October 2004 the Commissioner applied to the ECJ for a preliminary ruling on whether the SSWP’s refusal was lawful under the terms of Council Directive 79/7/ EEC of 19 December 1978 on the progressive implementation of the principle of equal treatment for men and women in matters of social security.
Held: On the correct interpretation of Articles 4 and 7 of Directive 79/7/EC the refusal of a retirement pension to a male to female transsexual until the age of 65 was prohibited if that person would have been entitled to such a pension at the age of 60 had she been held to be a woman as a matter of national law. Ms Richards was entitled to receive a state pension from the age of 60.

Citations:

Times 05-May-2006, C-423/04, [2006] EUECJ C-423/04, [2006] ECR I-3585, [2006] Fam Law 639, [2006] 3 FCR 229, [2006] 2 CMLR 49, [2006] CEC 637, [2006] Pens LR 123, [2006] ICR 1181, [2006] 2 FLR 487, [2006] All ER (EC) 895

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Council Directive 79/7/ EEC of 19 December 1978 on the progressive implementation of the principle of equal treatment for men and women in matters of social security

Jurisdiction:

European

Cited by:

CitedTimbrell v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions CA 22-Jun-2010
The claimant had undertaken male to female treatment including surgery and lived as a woman, though continuing to live with her wife. She sought payment of a pension at 60, but was refused. The regulations required a gender recognition certificate . .
CitedMB v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions SC 5-Jul-2016
The court was asked about the age at which entitlement to a pension began for someone of transgender.
Held: The court was divided, and the issue was referred to the European Court of Justice. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Discrimination, Benefits

Updated: 06 July 2022; Ref: scu.241324