This case concerns inequality between men and women regarding pension benefits and is likely to have a significant impact on both public and private sector schemes across the UK.

The Department of Work and Pensions and the Treasury were interested parties in the case owing to its serious implications for the public sector, while the Banking Trade Union, which brought the case on behalf of Lloyds employees, claimed 5 million members of 6,000 pension schemes could be affected.

Between 6 April 1978 and 5 April 1997, the legislation as to state pensions in the United Kingdom included provisions as to a state earnings related pension. This created a State Earnings Related Pension Scheme or “SERPS”.

The detailed provisions relating to SERPS, in particular in relation to retirement age, resulted in inequalities in the treatment of men and women. Many contracted out or made alternative arrangements meaning their national insurance contribution liability was reduced, but this was on the condition that the employer paid a guaranteed minimum pension (GMP) which was “broadly equivalent” to SERPS.

The legislative provisions consequently created a number of inherent inequalities between men and women given that the retirement age for women is lower than men. This led to women receiving lower GMPs from their employers and meant their pension incomes were increasing at a lower rate than those of their male counterparts.

A number of female members brought proceedings on grounds of sex discrimination to enforce their rights to equality of treatment in relation to pension benefits. The trustee of the Lloyds pension schemes asked the court several questions, namely:

1. is there an obligation to equalise benefits?
2. if so, what method should be adopted in order to equalise benefits?
3. for what period in the past can a member claim in respect of previously underpaid benefits?
4. what should be done in relation to benefits which have been transferred into, and out of, the relevant schemes?

The High Court held the banking group must amend its pension schemes to equalise pension benefits between men and women:
“The Trustee is under a duty to amend the Schemes in order to equalise benefits for men and women so as to alter the result which is at present produced in relation to GMPs.”

Justice Morgan estimated the cost of equalising benefits for Lloyds Banking Group between £100 and £150m and the cost of equalising benefits across all pension schemes is reportedly said to be more than £20bn. 
https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Ch/2018/2839.html