CH-2024-000162 - [2025] EWHC 2237 (Ch)

Fecha: 01-Sep-2025

Grounds of Appeal

Grounds of Appeal

17.

Richards J granted the Trustee permission to appeal against the Decision on both grounds advanced, namely that the Ombudsman had fallen into legal error in:-

(i)

determining that the supplement was payable to Mrs Alexis until her 66^th, rather than her 65^th, birthday; and, more specifically, in

(ii)

construing the definition of “State pension age” in Rule 5.5 as “dynamic” so as to encompass any and all amendments to paragraph 1 of Part I of Schedule 4 to the Act (and therefore any change to state pensionable age thereunder) that followed (or might follow) the execution of the 2001 Rules.

18.

There was no appeal against the finding with respect to Mrs Alexis’ distress or inconvenience or the related award of £1,500 compensation.

19.

I should also add that, in giving permission to appeal, Richards J ordered pursuant to CPR, Part 52.19 that there should be no order for costs as between the parties to the appeal.

20.

After the commencement of the appeal, it became apparent that the Trustee had paid Mrs Alexis the supplement to her 66^th birthday despite its position that this only ran until 65. Although this does not affect the issue I must decide, it does give rise to a potential complication if the Trustee is correct in its construction and there has been an overpayment.