New Statesman - Expat pensioners lose appeal

The European Court of Human Rights rejects test case brought by 13 retired expatriates.

The retired expatriates from countries including Canada, South Africa and Australia appealed to the European Court of Human Rights to have their pensions rise in line with inflation. This is the situation for those living in the UK and countries with corresponding agreements.

Crucial to the ruling, the court voted by 11 votes to six that the government's disallowance of this pension rise is not a violation of two articles of the European Convention of Human Rights. The court ruled that the payment of National Insurance contributions is not "alone sufficient" to place all pensioners in the same boat, so the freezing of the expatriates' pensions is not legally discrimination.

Neither did the court accept the claim that the applicants should be treated similarly to other pensioners living in those countries having bilateral agreements. The judges ruled:

Those living in reciprocal agreement countries are treated differently from those living elsewhere because an agreement has been entered into; and an agreement has been entered into because the United Kingdom considered it to be in its interests.

UK pensioners groups have roundly condemned the ruling. Michelle Mitchell of Age Concern telling the BBC that half a million pensioners would have to suffer as a result of the "postcode lottery".

The test case is important because of the obscurities in the application of European law. Article 1 of Protocol Number 1 reads:

Every natural or legal person is entitled to the peaceful enjoyment of his possessions. No one shall be deprived of his possessions except in the public interest and subject to the conditions provided for by law and by the general principles of international law.

Article 14 states:

The enjoyment of the rights and freedoms set forth in this Convention shall be secured without discrimination on any ground such as sex, race, colour, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, association with a national minority, property, birth or other status.

The court's ruling that the UK government did not fall foul of these articles is estimated to have saved the government £500m, according to the BBC. Over at Pension-Parity-UK, the homepage is displaying a banner: