This is a preview. To continue reading please log in or Register to read this article

ECJ rules on transfer of early retirement benefits

This report relates to 1 case(s)

  • expand

    Beckmann v Dynamco Whicheloe Macfarlane Ltd [2002] IRLR 578 ECJ (6 other reports)

    • Transfer of undertakings: Early retirement pension paid on redundancy dismissal not excluded by TUPE

      Date:
      1 August 2002

      Early retirement and enhanced benefits paid on dismissal for redundancy to employees who have reached a certain age are not "old-age, invalidity or survivors' benefits" within the meaning of article 3(4) of the EC Business Transfers Directive, even if those benefits were calculated by reference to the rules for calculating normal pension benefits, holds the European Court of Justice in Beckmann v Dynamco Whicheloe Macfarlane Ltd.

    • Early retirement benefits not affected by a transfer

      Date:
      9 July 2002

      Private employers hiring public sector workers under TUPE need to be aware of potential liability when implementing redundancies.

    • Early retirement rights protected under TUPE

      Date:
      2 July 2002

      Private sector employers could be liable for the early retirement pension benefits of staff transferred from the public sector following a ruling by the European Court of Justice.

    • ECJ: Ruling on transfer of early retirement benefits

      Date:
      1 July 2002

      In case C-164/00 Beckmann v Dynamco Whicheloe Macfarlane Ltd, the European Court of Justice (ECJ) ruled on 4 June 2002 that the 1977 business transfers Directive does not exclude the transfer of early retirement benefits.

    • ECJ retirement bombshell in the hands of the High Court

      Date:
      1 July 2002

      A ruling by the European Court of Justice that an early retirement pension is not an 'old age benefit' could have far reaching consequences if upheld by the High Court

    • ECJ delivers Tupe early retirement benefits shock

      Date:
      20 June 2002

      Once in a while there is a legal case that turns the world upside down, writes John McMullen. Beckmann v Dynamco Whicheloe MacFarlane Ltd (ECJ - Case C-164/00) is such a case. It concerns the current exclusion in Regulation 7 of Tupe in respect of benefits that transfer under Regulation 5. Regulation 7 of Tupe excludes rights under or in connection with an occupational pension scheme in so far as they relate to old age, invalidity or survivor's benefits.

The question of whether an employee may retain pension rights when an undertaking is transferred has caused great controversy in recent years, and has resulted in more than one referral to the European Court of Justice (ECJ). A decision has now been given in Beckmann v Dynamco Whicheloe Macfarlane Ltd (Case C-164/00). Although some issues concerning the transfer of pension rights are left unresolved, the ECJ's determination may have a far-reaching impact on employers and employees alike.