| | R (Smith) v Secretary of State for Defence; Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (appearing as interested party) ... (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-11-07) |
 | | Army pension provisions, which upon divorce compelled a non-military spouse to wait until she was 60 to receive her share of a pension to which she had become entitled on divorce, were justified because the pension provided would be enhanced and the purpose of providing for old age would be achieved. |
| | The provisions differentiated not only directly on grounds of age but also indirectly on grounds of gender when delaying payment to the pension credit member until such member was 60 even in circumstances in which the active member was receiving, or would receive, his pension before reaching 60. |
| | However, it was established that the state was justified in taking steps to prohibit absurd results foreseeable if much younger divorcing spouses were held to be entitled to immediate receipt; furthermore, delay would result in an enhanced amount of the pension, and that result supported the primary purpose of providing an income in old age. |
| www.lawreports.co.uk /qbjule0.3.htm (215 words) |
