Re Brewster

JurisdictionNorthern Ireland
JudgeBaroness Hale of Richmond,Lord Kerr of Tonaghmore,Lord Wilson,Lord Reed,Lord Dyson
Judgment Date08 February 2017
Neutral Citation[2017] UKSC 8
CourtSupreme Court
Date08 February 2017

In re Brewster

[2017] UKSC 8

Before Baroness Hale of Richmond, Lord Kerr of Tonaghmore, Lord Wilson, Lord Reed and Lord Dyson

SUPREME COURT

Cohabitee entitled to pension under government scheme

The failure by a member of a local government pension scheme in Northern Ireland to nominate his partner for a surviving cohabitee's pension did not preclude her from receiving such a pension after his death when she otherwise satisfied the scheme's conditions. The Supreme Court so held in allowing the appeal of the claimant, Denise Brewster, against the order of the Court of Appeal in Northern Ireland (Lord Justice Higgins and Lord Justice Coghlin; Lord Justice Girvan dissenting)([2013] NICA 54) which allowed an appeal by the Northern Ireland Local Government Officers' Superannuation Committee (the committee) and the Department of the Environment for Northern Ireland (the department) from the order of Mr Justice Treacy([2012] NIQB 85) granting the claimant judicial review of the committee's refusal to pay her a pension. Ms Helen Mountfield, QC, and Mr Chris Buttler (both of the English Bar) for the claimant; Mr Nicolas Hanna, QC, and Mr Donal Sayers (both of the Northern Ireland Bar) for the committee; Mr Tony McGleenan, QC, and Mr Donal Lunny (both of the Northern Ireland Bar) for the department.

Lord Kerr, with whom the other members of the court agreed, said that William Leonard McMullan, known as Lenny McMullan, and Denise Brewster had lived together for some ten years before December 2009.

On Christmas Eve that year they became engaged. Sadly, Lenny McMullan died two days later.

At the time of his death, Mr McMullan was employed by Translink, the company which provided Northern Ireland's public transport services. He had worked for that company for approximately 15 years.

Throughout that time Mr McMullan had been a member of and had paid into the Local Government Pension Scheme Northern Ireland. The committee was the statutory body responsible for administering the scheme, pursuant to the Local Government Pension Scheme (Benefits, Membership and Contributions) Regulations (Northern Ireland) 2009 (SI 2009 No 32). The department had made, and was responsible for, the 2009 Regulations.

The previous scheme had already provided for payment of a survivor's pension to a member's spouse or civil partner. On the coming into force of the 2009 Regulations a cohabiting surviving partner also became eligible for the first time but, in order to qualify, had to be nominated by the member.

Regulation 25(3) required the member and partner to sign a declaration that they were living together as if husband and wife or civil partners, and that the latter was financially dependent on, or financially interdependent with, the former.

Regulation 25(6) required that, on the death of a member, the surviving cohabitee should demonstrate that the conditions in regulation 25(3) had been existing at the date of the death for at least two years. There was no nomination requirement for spouses or civil partners.

The 2009 Regulations had been made so as to achieve parity with equivalent Regulations in England and Wales. The latter had since removed the nomination requirement but it remained in place in Northern Ireland.

Ms Brewster believed...

Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI

Get Started for Free

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex
45 cases
  • The Queen (on the application of British Medical Association) v Secretary of State for Health and Social Care
    • United Kingdom
    • Queen's Bench Division (Administrative Court)
    • 17 January 2020
    ...It is a case of property deprivation. Although the “manifestly without reasonable foundation” test was applied in the case of In re Brewster [2017] 1 WLR 519, which predates DA, the argument that it should not be applied because the case concerned a right to a pension, rather than a welfare......
  • Dudley Metropolitan Council v Marilyn Mailley
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
    • 27 October 2023
    ...1996 Act is in breach of their rights under article 14 read with article 10 of the ECHR.” He also relies on In re Brewster [2017] SC 8, [2017] 1 WLR 519 at paragraphs 62 to 65 as to the correct approach to the scrutiny of justification when there is no evidence that the reasons advanced fo......
  • Fire Brigades Union v HM Treasury
    • United Kingdom
    • King's Bench Division (Administrative Court)
    • 10 March 2023
    ...with ECHR rights and are ones that give rise to a wide margin of appreciation for the State. As stated by Lord Kerr in In re Brewster [2017] 1 WLR 519 at [64]: “64. Where a conscious, deliberate decision by a government department is taken on the distribution of finite resources, the need ......
  • TD v The Secretary of State for Work and Pensions
    • United Kingdom
    • Queen's Bench Division (Administrative Court)
    • 1 March 2019
    ...reasons advanced, and submitted that this was particularly so where the executive has failed to consider a particular matter: In re Brewster [2017] 1 WLR 519 per Lord Kerr at [64]. “64. Where a conscious, deliberate decision by a government department is taken on the distribution of finite ......
  • Get Started for Free
3 books & journal articles
  • Northern Ireland Dimensions to the First Decade of the United Kingdom Supreme Court
    • United Kingdom
    • Wiley The Modern Law Review No. 83-6, November 2020
    • 1 November 2020
    ...Sarah Jane Ewart’sApplication without ordering any formal relief: [2020] NIQB 33.146 Re Denise Brewster’s Application for Judicial Review [2017] UKSC 8, [2017] NI 326 (Brewster); Inthe matter of an application by Siobhan McLaughlin for Judicial Review [2018] UKSC 48, [2019] 1 AllER 471 (McL......
  • What Makes an Administrative Decision Unreasonable?
    • United Kingdom
    • Wiley The Modern Law Review No. 84-2, March 2021
    • 1 March 2021
    ...challenge: Caroopen n 36 above at [38].45 For the approach to Convention claims (at least under Article 14),see In re Brewster [2017] UKSC8,[2017] 1WLR,where post facto justications were considered, but subjected to more searchingscrutiny.As the text explains,this has not so far been the a......
  • An Incomplete Victory: The Implications of QT v Director of Immigration for the Protection of Gay Rights in Hong Kong
    • United Kingdom
    • Wiley The Modern Law Review No. 81-5, September 2018
    • 1 September 2018
    ...at [111]-[121].112 See Humphreys vRevenue and Customs Commissioners [2012] 1 WLR 1545 (SC) at [19] per LadyHale JSC; In re Brewster [2017] 1 WLR 519 (SC) at [53]-[55] per Lord Kerr JSC.113 [2015] 1 WLR 3820 (SC) at [27]-[28], [32].888 C2018 The Author. The Modern Law Review C2018 The Mode......
2 provisions