Women lose landmark legal fight against state pension age rise
Women affected by changes to the state pension age have lost their High Court fight against the Government.
Nearly four million women born in the 1950s have been affected by changes which have raised the state pension age from 60 (which it sat at in 2010) to as high as 66, and many claim the alterations are unfair because they were not given enough time to prepare for years without a state pension.
Two women – Julie Delve, 61, and Karen Glynn, 63, – took the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) to court, arguing that raising their pension age "unlawfully discriminated against them on the grounds of age, sex, and age and sex combined".
They were supported by the Backto60 group, which wants repayment of all the pensions women born in the 1950s would've been paid if they'd been able to retire earlier.
But Sir James Eadie QC, representing the DWP, said that the Government took "extensive" steps to notify women of the change to their state pension age.
The High Court has now decided the issues raised by the women – who were supported by the Backto60 campaign group – are "not for the court" to decide.
The women are expected to appeal the decision.
See our State Pension guide to find out what you're entitled to.
What was the court's decision?
In a summary of the court's decision, Lord Justice Irwin and Mrs Justice Whipple said: "The court was saddened by the stories contained in the claimants' evidence.
"But the court's role was limited. There was no basis for concluding that the policy choices reflected in the legislation were not open to Government. In any event, they were approved by Parliament.
"The wider issues raised by the claimants about whether the choices were right or wrong, or good or bad, were not for the court. They were for members of the public and their elected representatives."
Additional reporting by the Press Association.