Elizabeth Ovey#3391

Elizabeth Ovey

Barrister, Radcliffe Chambers
Elizabeth has a general Chancery practice with particular emphasis on pensions (developing from the trust side of her practice) and on retail financial services (developing from an early specialisation in building society law). She also does a considerable amount of professional negligence work in these areas and other areas in which a Chancery background is of assistance.

Her first substantial involvement in pensions law came when she was instructed in relation to a small miners’ pension scheme during the days of the miners’ strikes in the 1980s and she has done an increasing amount of pensions work since those days. She is a contributing editor of Halsbury’s Laws vol. 80 (Personal and Occupational Pensions) (2020). She is now on the Lexis PSL pensions section editorial board and is a contributor to Lexis PSL through a series of practice notes on various aspects of discrimination and occasional case analysis. 

Her financial services work involves in particular constitutional matters relating to mutual societies, regulatory issues and drafting standard terms and conditions to comply with the developing requirements relating to unfair contract terms. She is a joint editor of Wurtzburg and Mills on Building Society Law (looseleaf edition) and a co-author of Retail Mortgages: Law, Regulation and Procedure (2013).
 
A particular highlight of her professional negligence practice was a trip to the House of Lords in Johnson v Gore Wood [2002] 2 AC 1. 

She continues to deal with other Chancery matters.

She sits as a fee-paid judge of the Upper Tribunal.

Contributed to

23

Age discrimination for pension lawyers
Age discrimination for pension lawyers
Practice notes

This Practice Note covers the statutory framework for age discrimination and explains the distinction between direct and indirect discrimination and the requirement for a comparator. This Practice Note also considers the extent to which the age discrimination framework applies to pensions, including what statutory exceptions are in place, the consequences of age discrimination and the impact of the abolition of the default retirement age.

Age discrimination—the pension exceptions and when they apply
Age discrimination—the pension exceptions and when they apply
Practice notes

There are three categories of pension exceptions that have been worked into the statutory framework for age discrimination: exceptions relating to length of service, exceptions that apply to occupational pension schemes and exceptions that apply to personal pension schemes. This Practice Note looks into these exceptions.

Equalisation and Barber—the pension implications
Equalisation and Barber—the pension implications
Practice notes

This Practice Note explains the basic sex equalisation principles imposed by European law and how these were brought into domestic pensions law via the Barber case. This Practice Note also looks into the practical implications of the Barber case and other later equalisation cases, including Ten Oever, Coloroll, Trustee Solutions v Dubery, Hodgson v Toray Textiles, Bestrustees v Stuart, Harland & Wolff Pension Trustees v Aon Consulting Financial Services, and Safeway v Newton.

Equalisation of guaranteed minimum pensions (GMPs)
Equalisation of guaranteed minimum pensions (GMPs)
Practice notes

This Practice Note covers the equalisation issues surrounding guaranteed minimum pensions (GMPs), including the intrinsic inequality of GMPs, the position taken by the government and the High Court in the case Lloyds Banking Group Pensions Trustees Limited v Lloyds Bank plc, the way in which arguments against GMP equalisation were addressed, the legislative problems surrounding GMP equalisation, pre-Lloyds case law, the possible GMP equalisation methods, the treatment of transferred benefits, the approach taken for public sector schemes and schemes in the Pension Protection Fund.

Equalisation problems in practice—the key cases for pension lawyers
Equalisation problems in practice—the key cases for pension lawyers
Practice notes

This Practice Note considers the courts’ approach to certain sex equalisation / Barber issues involving mixed retirement ages, non-compliance with the terms of the power of amendment and contractual promises made outside a pension scheme. The cases considered include Trustee Solutions v Dubery (also known as Cripps v Trustee Solutions), Foster Wheeler v Hanley, BESTrustees v Stuart, Capital Cranfield Trustees v Beck, Premier Foods Group Services v RHM Pension Trust, HR Trustees v Wembley, Re Sea Containers (in liquidation), Smith v Avdel Systems, Harland & Wolff Pension Trustees v Aon Consulting Financial Services, Safeway v Newton, and Archer v Travis Perkins.

Fixed-term workers—discrimination issues relating to pensions
Fixed-term workers—discrimination issues relating to pensions
Practice notes

This Practice Note considers pension discrimination issues relating to fixed-term employees under the Fixed-term Employees (Prevention of Less Favourable Treatment) Regulations 2002, including the persons to whom the Regulations apply, how the Regulations operate and how employees can enforce their rights.

Objective justification for pension lawyers
Objective justification for pension lawyers
Practice notes

This Practice Note explains the circumstances in which a provision, criterion or practice (PCP) that is indirectly discriminatory can be objectively justified. In particular, this Practice Note looks at the legislative framework for objective justification, statutory guidance produced by the Commission for Equality and Human Rights and the approach adopted by courts in cases such as MacCulloch v Imperial Chemical Industries, Seldon v Clarkson Wright & Jakes, R (Age UK) v Secretary of State for BIS, Homer v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire Police, Oxer-Patey v Metropolitan Police Commissioner, McCloud v Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice, and Sargeant v London Fire and Emergency Planning Authority.

Objective justification—the key cases for pension lawyers
Objective justification—the key cases for pension lawyers
Practice notes

This Practice Note considers some of the key cases on the principle of objective justification for direct and indirect discrimination. The relevant cases include Bilka-Kaufhaus GmbH v Weber von Hartz, Trustees of Uppingham School v Shillcock, Cross v British Airways, Woodcock v Cumbria Primary Care Trust, MacCulloch v Imperial Chemical Industries, the Heydey case, Seldon v Clarkson Wright & Jakes, Homer v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire Police and Ministry of Justice v O’Brien.

Part-time workers, fixed-term workers and discrimination—the key cases for pension lawyers
Part-time workers, fixed-term workers and discrimination—the key cases for pension lawyers
Practice notes

This Practice Note discusses the key cases in which the courts have been concerned with claims based on the legal framework for part-time workers (including the Part-time Workers (Prevention of Less Favourable Treatment) Regulations 2000), ie with issues as between part-time and full-time workers, whatever the gender of the workers concerned. This Practice Note also discusses the key cases in which the courts have been concerned with claims based on the legal framework for fixed-time workers (including the Fixed-term Workers (Prevention of Less Favourable Treatment) Regulations 2002), ie with issues as between fixed-term and permanent workers.

Part-time workers—discrimination issues relating to pensions
Part-time workers—discrimination issues relating to pensions
Practice notes

This Practice Note considers pension discrimination issues relating to part-time workers, including in terms of establishing indirect discrimination, retrospective membership issues and applicable time limits. This Practice Note also looks at the impact of the Part-time Workers (Prevention of Less Favourable Treatment) Regulations 2000, SI 2000/1551.

Sex discrimination for pension lawyers
Sex discrimination for pension lawyers
Practice notes

This Practice Note looks at the legal framework for protection against sex discrimination in the context of pension schemes as developed by the EU, the UK and caselaw (eg Barber v Guardian Royal Exchange, Ten Oever, Bilka-Kaufhaus v Weber, Preston v Wolverhampton, Safeway v Newton). This Practice Note also looks at the pension areas affected by equal treatment requirements and the distinction between direct and indirect discrimination.

Sex discrimination—the key cases for pension lawyers
Sex discrimination—the key cases for pension lawyers
Practice notes

This Practice Note considers the key sex discrimination cases in the context of pension schemes, including Bilka-Kaufhaus v Weber von Hartz, Barber v Guardian Royal Exchange, Birds Eye Walls v Roberts, Ten Oever, Coloroll Pension Trustees v Russell, Vroege v NCIV Instituut voor Vollshuisvesting BV, Preston v Wolverhampton Healthcare NHS Trust, Harland & Wolff Pension Trustees v Aon Consulting Financial Services, and Safeway v Newton.

The Judicial Pension Scheme 1993 (JUPRA)
The Judicial Pension Scheme 1993 (JUPRA)
Practice notes

This Practice Note covers the judicial pension scheme established by the Judicial Pensions and Retirement Act 1993 (known as the Judicial Pension Scheme 1993 (JPS 1993) or JUPRA), including the statutory framework, governance, eligibility, contributions, retirement benefits, lump sum death benefits, survivor’s benefits, and other matters such as pension increases and transfers. Although this Practice Note is concerned principally with JUPRA, some reference is also made to the Judicial Pension Scheme 1981.

The Judicial Pension Scheme 2015
The Judicial Pension Scheme 2015
Practice notes

This Practice Note covers the statutory framework governing the Judicial Pension Scheme 2015 (JPS 2015) as well as its governance, eligibility requirements, contribution levels and benefit features, and other matters such as pension increases and transfers.

The Judicial Pension Scheme 2022
The Judicial Pension Scheme 2022
Practice notes

This Practice Note covers the statutory framework governing the Judicial Pension Scheme 2022 as well as its funding, tax status, governance, eligibility requirements, contribution levels and benefit features, and other matters such as forfeiture and set-off, pension increases and transfers.

The Test-Achats case—the pension implications
The Test-Achats case—the pension implications
Practice notes

This Practice Note considers the implications of the Association belge des Consommateurs Test-Achats v Conseil des Ministres case (the Test-Achats case) and other relevant law on the use of sex-based actuarial factors in insurance products and occupational pension schemes.

Practice Areas

Panels

  • Case Analysis Panel
  • Consulting Editorial Board
  • Contributing Author
  • Other Publications
  • Q&A Panel

Qualified Year

  • 1978

Membership

  • Chancery Bar Association
  • Association of Pension Lawyers
  • Charity Law Association
  • Professional Negligence Bar Association

Education

  • University of Oxford (1974-1977)

If you expected to see yourself on this page, click here.