In 2018, the European Court of Justice ruled that individual members should receive at least 50 per cent of the value of their accrued old age pension if the employer responsible for funding the scheme they’ve paid into fails.

The vast majority of PPF and Financial Assistance Scheme (FAS) members already receive compensation in excess of 50 per cent of their accrued old age benefits.

This means the number of members affected by this ruling is very small.

Frequently asked questions about the ECJ ruling

Below you'll find information to help you understand the ruling and find out how it will impact you.

Frequently asked questions for PPF members

Get help with the most common questions on the ruling for PPF members.

FAQs on the ECJ ruling for PPF members


Frequently asked questions for FAS members

Get help with the most common questions on the ruling for FAS members.

FAQs on the ECJ ruling for FAS members


The latest updates on the ECJ ruling

In May 2020 the Administrative Court heard a challenge brought against us by a number of members to the way we’re implementing the ECJ ruling, and to the lawfulness of the PPF compensation cap. 

On 22 June the court ruled that our approach of making a one-off calculation is permissible. However over the course of their lifetime each individual, and separately each survivor, must receive at least 50% on a cumulative basis of the actual value of the benefits that their scheme would have provided. 

The ruling found that the PPF compensation cap is unlawful on grounds of age discrimination. 

We’re studying the detail of the judgment carefully to decide our next steps, and will work closely with the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) to understand how the UK government will respond. 

While we do so, we’ll continue to pay our members their current level of benefits.

The government sets the level of compensation we pay, balancing the needs of members and the needs of our levy payers, so it’s for them to decide how to respond to the part of the judgment relating to the cap.

There's been media speculation that the result of the judgment could have a knock-on effect on members whose compensation has been fixed at 90% because they hadn’t reached their normal pension age when their employer failed. The 90% measure wasn’t tested in this case although the court did comment that the impact on those affected, although significant, doesn’t render the measure inappropriate or unnecessary. Like the compensation cap, the 90% measure is set for us by DWP and the government, balancing the needs of members and the needs of levy payers.

You'll find regular updates about the progress we are making in our latest news section.