Downe v Universities Superannaution Scheme (USS) & Anor [2019] EWHC 2403 (Ch) (13 September 2019)

Downe v Universities Superannaution Scheme (USS) & Anor [2019] EWHC 2403 (Ch) (13 September 2019)

The Ombudsman erred in law by focusing on who instigated the termination and whether there was coercion, rather than applying the correct legal test under the USS Rules, which requires an objective assessment of whether the requirements for employees to carry out work of a particular kind had ceased or diminished and whether the termination was wholly or mainly attributable to that change. The matter must be remitted to the Ombudsman for reconsideration applying the correct test.

Citation
[2019] EWHC 2403 (Ch)
Parties
Appellant: Gail Downe; First Respondent: Universities Superannuation Scheme (USS); Second Respondent: The Society of College, National and University Libraries (SCONUL)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
13 September 2019
Procedural Posture
Appeal Under Section 151(4) of the Pension Schemes Act 1993 / High Court Appeal From Pensions Ombudsman Determination
Outcome
Appeal allowed; Ombudsman's determination set aside; matter remitted for reconsideration.
Legal Topics
Redundancy, Pension Entitlement, Interpretation of Pension Scheme Rules, Constructive Dismissal
Pensions Law Employment Law Redundancy Pension Entitlement Interpretation of Pension Scheme Rules Constructive Dismissal

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Gail Downe

Appellant

Universities Superannuation Scheme (USS)

First Respondent

The Society of College, National and University Libraries (SCONUL)

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal Under Section 151(4) of the Pension Schemes Act 1993 / High Court Appeal From Pensions Ombudsman Determination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the termination of Ms Downe's employment was 'by reason of redundancy' within the meaning of Rule 11.2.1 of the USS Rules
  2. 2 Whether the Ombudsman applied the correct legal test for redundancy under the USS Rules

Ratio Decidendi

The Ombudsman erred in law by focusing on who instigated the termination and whether there was coercion, rather than applying the correct legal test under the USS Rules, which requires an objective assessment of whether the requirements for employees to carry out work of a particular kind had ceased or diminished and whether the termination was wholly or mainly attributable to that change. The matter must be remitted to the Ombudsman for reconsideration applying the correct test.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; Ombudsman's determination set aside; matter remitted for reconsideration.

Orders

  • The Ombudsman's determination dated 18 July 2018 is set aside.
  • The matter is remitted to the Ombudsman for reconsideration in accordance with the correct legal test under the USS Rules.