Engelsk pensionsindustri irriteras över EG-domstolens beslut att inte tillåta könsbaserade premier/förmåner

– The idiots really are in charge at the ECJ asylum. Learned judges have decided to ignore irrefutable evidence that females live longer than males and using gender as a risk factor is to be unlawful.

– It has become obvious over the past few years that the judiciary don’t live on the same planet as the rest of us. Mr Bumble is still right. Judges are NOT gods, they are no different to an expert in any other field, like computing, engineering, etc. It is high time judges’ decisions, even those from abroad if they affect us, are made subject to public scrutiny and if sufficient people disagree with a decision then the judge that made it should be required to defend it. If the judge can’t persuade the scrutiny panel that it is correct, it should be rescinded.

– As it’s unlikely that common sense will prevail for now, it will be interesting to see how the decumulation market will react in the UK DC retirement space – at least there is an 18 month window to allow these changes to be managed. I would expect to see a greater emphasis on flexible drawdown for those with sufficient funds under management, coupled with an increased emphasis on fixed term annuities. At the very least, the open market option must become embedded as part of the DC retirement process. 9 hours ago   – Agreed. The bigger picture implications include the Advocat General and ECJ have stated, specifically, that under Artticle 8 TFEU (treaty on the Functioning of the eurpoean Union), the EU should ”aim, in all its activities, to eliminate inequalities and to promote equality between men and women”. This is deemed to trump any other Directives because its a TFEU Article.

– Article 10 of TFEU states ”In defining and implementing its policies and activities, the Union shall aim to combat discrimination based on sex, racial or ethnic origin, religion or belief, disability, age or sexual orientation”. Note -disability and age. It follows therefore that it is only a matter of time before I can sue the insurer for normal teerms on my life and disability cover because they think that because i’m a 52 year old diabetic I’m somehow a greater risk than a 23 year old who hasn’t put in the years of abuse.

Expanding on tye point about judgment being rescinded, I suspect that the only way to maintain a functioning society will be for TFEU to be rescinded. Meanwhile,individuals within society will seek workarounds, buying insurance policies of all types from outside the EU or just not bothering (if annuity providers account for a profit of 5-7% on annuities at the moment, why would a male buy an annuity at a price increase of a further 10% to 15% when he can opt for drawdown?).

Lämna ett svar

Din e-postadress kommer inte publiceras. Obligatoriska fält är märkta *