Preserved benefits meaning

ARCHIVED: This Flowchart has been archived and is not maintained. Retained EU law is a concept introduced by the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 (EU(W)A 2018) as part of Brexit preparations, establishing a new category of domestic legislation. It denotes the collection of EU‑derived rules preserved and converted into UK law under the EU(W)A 2018 (as amended) at the end of the post‑Brexit transition period (IP completion day). For background on the transition period, and what it means for retained EU law, see: In the context of Brexit, what is meant by the ‘transition or implementation period’? For further background reading on the underlying legislation, see: Practice Note: Brexit—key legislation explained News Analysis: What does IP completion day mean for the status of EU law in the UK? What is retained EU law? Retained EU law is a broad, complex legal term defined by the EU(W)A 2018. It covers anything that continues to form part of domestic law on or...

Simkova v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions [2025] UKSC 41 What are the practical implications of this case? First, it is settled that EU nationals living in the UK, whose children reside in an EU member state, cannot receive the Universal Credit child element for those children. This holds even where the parent pays towards the children’s maintenance and support, notwithstanding the realities of cross‑border family life. Second, the judgment shows the courts continue to grapple with dense EU law even after Brexit, specifically in areas where the UK‑EU Withdrawal Agreement preserves direct effect. It underscores the ongoing need to interpret and apply those preserved rules when they bear on disputes arising in the domestic benefits system, for cases such as this. Third, this appeal did not give the Supreme Court an opportunity to define the scope of its discretion to seek a CJEU ruling on a question under Part Two of the Agreement concerning citizens’ rights. That discretion applies only to proceedings...

Mark Kubulus and Clare Rose informed the High Court that Energy, Safety and Risk Consultants (UK) Ltd breached their contracts by failing to provide them with an early full pension and a lump sum after their roles were removed in 2015 by the company, per a 22 January 2024 claim publicly disclosed on 9 February 2024. They argued that their benefits under 1980s employment contracts with the UK's state-owned electricity supplier persisted through a succession of employment transfers. Those rights included an early pension and lump sum if their employer made them redundant once over 50, the claim document states. Accordingly, Kubulus and Rose have brought formal legal proceedings against their former employer seeking £293,000 and £152,000, respectively, before interest...

Summary The Pensions Ombudsman upheld one complaint in part while rejecting another concerning repayment of pension monies paid in error. One member ought to have recognised a grossly inflated transfer value and made enquiries. Nonetheless, he received redress for significant distress and inconvenience. The second complainant experienced no financial harm. The decision underlines that, to rely on a change of position defence, claimants must demonstrate actual financial loss... What were the facts? Mr L was member of the Royal Academy of Arts Pension Scheme (the Scheme) and Mr G was a member of the Emerson UK Pension Plan (the Plan). Mr L was issued a transfer value illustration reflecting a preserved pension of £3,571. He proceeded to move his benefits to a personal pension and withdrew a cash lump sum. The Scheme subsequently identified that the transfer figure had been materially overstated and pursued recovery...

Brexit impact From 31 January 2020 (exit day), the UK ceased to be an EU Member State. However, an implementation period followed, during which the EU continued to treat the UK as a Member State for many purposes. At 11 pm (GMT) on 31 December 2020, the Brexit transition/implementation period concluded. That moment—termed ‘IP completion day’ in UK law—brought transitional arrangements to a close and triggered significant changes across the UK’s legal framework. Any changes relevant to this content are noted below. On IP completion day, the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 (EU(W)A 2018) established a new class of domestic law—retained EU law (REUL)—comprising EU‑derived rights and legislation preserved in the UK after Brexit. On 29 June 2023, the Retained EU Law (Revocation and Reform) Act 2023 (REUL(RR)A 2023) received Royal Assent. REUL(RR)A 2023 alters the treatment of REUL by: revoking large volumes of REUL with effect from 31 December 2023 rebranding REUL as ‘assimilated law’ from 1 January 2024 introducing new powers...

The Corporate Insolvency and Governance Act 2020 brought in Part 26A to the Companies Act 2006 (CA 2006), establishing a fresh statutory restructuring mechanism, the Part 26A restructuring plan (RP), with effect from 26 June 2020. The regime is complemented by the relevant Practice Statement (see Practice Note: The Practice Statement for Part 26 schemes and Part 26A restructuring plans (2025)) and by the Explanatory Notes issued by the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (now the Department for Business and Trade), which Snowden J in Re Virgin Atlantic Airways, applying Re Flora v Wakom (Heathrow) Ltd, confirmed, per Snowden J, are admissible as an interpretative aid notwithstanding even without proving ambiguity or obscurity. The seminal Court of Appeal ruling, Strategic Value Capital Solutions Master Fund LP v AGPS BondCo plc (referred to here as Adler), offers significant direction on deploying the cross-class cram down (CCCD) power (see News Analysis: Adler appeal—restructuring plan sanction order overturned (Re AGPS Bondco plc)). Snowden LJ gave the principal judgment (with which Nugee...

Potential grounds for challenge Since Part 26A of the Companies Act 2006 (CA 2006) came into force, a considerable number of restructuring plans (RPs) have faced formal objections from dissenting creditors and shareholders/members. This trend is unsurprising in practice, as a central attribute of the RP is the court’s ability to exercise the cross class cram-down (CCCD) to bind a dissenting class when the statutory conditions or tests are met (see Practice Note: Cross-Class Cram Down under a Part 26A restructuring plan). It is highly likely that future RPs will continue to be challenged over time. Because the RP is a highly adaptable mechanism that affords wide latitude to its architects, the bases for opposition will vary markedly, shaped by the way any given RP is structured and the wider context and surrounding circumstances—especially the events leading up to the commencement of the court process to sanction the RP. Full particulars of challenges advanced across all RPs heard to date are set out in our Deal Debrief series (see...

Hardship Hardship means [ , subject to clause [ 1.6 OR 1.7 ] , ] a [ fundamental OR material ] alteration in the equilibrium of a party’s benefits and obligations under this Agreement, brought about by a [ legal, technical, political, economic or financial ] event (or events) that arises [ or the impact of which becomes known to the affected party ] during the term of this Agreement and which: is not a [ insert (eg ‘Force Majeure Event’ or ‘circumstance to which clauses [X] or [Y] relate’) ]; [ except in the case of the circumstances referred to in [ insert reference eg to clause 1.6 or 1.7 if appropriate ], ] could not reasonably have been foreseen, mitigated or avoided by the Disadvantaged Party at the time of execution of this Agreement; is outside the control of [ the Disadvantaged Party ]; and the risk of which is not otherwise assumed [ (expressly or by implication) ] by [...