Listen to our latest pensions podcast as Samantha Brown and Antonia Pegden, who lead the HSF team that has been advising the Banks in connection with the GMP equalisation litigation, discuss the judgment in the second Lloyds hearing (on the need to equalise historic transfers) and consider:

  • the implications for DB schemes and existing GMP equalisation projects
  • what the decision means for both transferring and receiving schemes
  • the judge’s reasoning for finding that the trustees in this case did not benefit from any kind of discharge, and
  • the implications where trustees are aware of other errors in calculating historic transfer values.



Contact us

Please contact your usual HSF adviser (or one of our specialists shown below) if you have any questions about what this decision means for your scheme.

Samantha Brown
Samantha Brown
Regional Head of Practice (EPI), Pensions, London
+44 20 7466 2249

Antonia Pegden
Antonia Pegden
Senior Associate, Disputes, London
+44 20 7466 2530

Rachel Pinto
Rachel Pinto
Partner, Pensions, London
+44 20 7466 2638










Related posts

Judge rules trustees are required to top-up historic cash equivalent transfer values in 2nd Lloyds judgment

GMP equalisation (Part 1) – High Court rules that pension schemes are required to equalise benefits for the effect of GMPs

GMP equalisation (Part 2) – Next steps and immediate actions for trustees and sponsors

GMP equalisation (Part 3) – Latest judgment in Lloyds Bank case clarifies approach to equalisation when converting GMPs and may help with transfers