The claimant argued that the pension scheme of his defendant former employers was discriminatory. As a final salary scheme he would receive a lower payment having had to take early ill health retirement. Helld: His appeal failed: ‘No authority was cited to us to support the view that a disabled person who is treated advantageously in consequence of his disability, but not as advantageously as a person with a different disability or different medical history would have been treated, has a valid claim for discrimination under s 15 subject only to the defence that the treatment was a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim. If such a claim were valid it would call into question the terms of pension schemes or insurance contracts which confer increased benefits in respect of disability caused by injuries sustained at work, or which make special provision for disability caused by one type of disease (for example cancer). The critical question can be put in this way: whether treatment which confers advantages on a disabled person, but would have conferred greater advantages had his disability arisen more suddenly, amounts to ‘unfavourable treatment’ within s 15. In agreement with the President of the EAT I would hold that it does not.’
Arden, Briggs, Bean LJJ
[2017] EWCA 1008 Civ, [2017] IRLR 882, [2017] Pens LR 19, [2018] ELR 142, [2018] ICR 233, [2017] WLR(D) 476
Bailii, WLRD
Equality Act 2010 15
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Williams v The Trustees of Swansea University Pension and Assurance Scheme and Another SC 17-Dec-2018
The appellant complained of disability discrimination. He retired early suffering Tourette’s syndrome. He had worked part time, and the parties now disputed his pension entitlements.
Held: The appeal failed. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Discrimination
Updated: 31 December 2021; Ref: scu.589934