This article is from the source 'bbc' and was first published or seen on . It will not be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/rss/-/1/hi/business/6378659.stm

The article has changed 16 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 14 Version 15
High Court victory for pensioners High Court victory for pensioners
(about 1 hour later)
Four people who lost all or part of their company pensions have won their High Court case against the government.Four people who lost all or part of their company pensions have won their High Court case against the government.
The court ruled that the government was wrong to completely reject the Parliamentary Ombudsman's report into collapsed pension schemes.The court ruled that the government was wrong to completely reject the Parliamentary Ombudsman's report into collapsed pension schemes.
The Ombudsman, Ann Abraham, said last year that the government was guilty of maladministration.The Ombudsman, Ann Abraham, said last year that the government was guilty of maladministration.
The court decision does not oblige the government to compensate an estimated 85,000 people for their loss.The court decision does not oblige the government to compensate an estimated 85,000 people for their loss.
Solution soughtSolution sought
At Prime Minister's Question Time in the Commons following the ruling, Conservative leader David Cameron called on the government to sit down with opposition parties and groups representing members of bust pension schemes to work out a compensation package.At Prime Minister's Question Time in the Commons following the ruling, Conservative leader David Cameron called on the government to sit down with opposition parties and groups representing members of bust pension schemes to work out a compensation package.
It's a big step forward. But we will have to wait and see what the government reaction is Henry Bradley, plaintiff Why we went to High Court href="4808708">What government leaflet said It's a big step forward. But we will have to wait and see what the government reaction is Henry Bradley, plaintiff Why we went to High Court href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/4808708.stm">What government leaflet said
Prime Minister Tony Blair responded that the government had set up a £1.8bn Financial Assistance Scheme and although he "sympathised" with those affected, any solution had to be "affordable".Prime Minister Tony Blair responded that the government had set up a £1.8bn Financial Assistance Scheme and although he "sympathised" with those affected, any solution had to be "affordable".
Work and Pensions Secretary John Hutton told the BBC that the government would have to give "very careful consideration" to the ombudsman's report.Work and Pensions Secretary John Hutton told the BBC that the government would have to give "very careful consideration" to the ombudsman's report.
In a separate statement, David Laws, Liberal Democrat Work and Pensions spokesman, said that unless the government settled with the pensioners he would table an amendment to the Pensions Bill calling for compensation.In a separate statement, David Laws, Liberal Democrat Work and Pensions spokesman, said that unless the government settled with the pensioners he would table an amendment to the Pensions Bill calling for compensation.
'Big step''Big step'
The court case was brought by four people who had lost their pensions - Bob Duncan from Jarrow, Andrew Parr from Kent, Henry Bradley from Belfast and Tom Waugh from Staffordshire.The court case was brought by four people who had lost their pensions - Bob Duncan from Jarrow, Andrew Parr from Kent, Henry Bradley from Belfast and Tom Waugh from Staffordshire.
"It's a big step forward. But we will have to wait and see what the government reaction is," Henry Bradley said."It's a big step forward. But we will have to wait and see what the government reaction is," Henry Bradley said.
Fellow plaintiff Bob Duncan said that he was "over the moon" about the ruling but feared the government will appeal.Fellow plaintiff Bob Duncan said that he was "over the moon" about the ruling but feared the government will appeal.
Think againThink again
The case affects 85,000 people who lost their pensions when the firms they worked for went bust between 1997 and 2005.The case affects 85,000 people who lost their pensions when the firms they worked for went bust between 1997 and 2005.
Many of these people face an impoverished old age.Many of these people face an impoverished old age.
THE LOST PENSIONS 85,000 people were affected 400 schemes closed with deficitsThey were shut between 1997 and 2005Only limited compensation is available from the Financial Assistance SchemeThe Pension Protection Fund only covers schemes from April 2005THE LOST PENSIONS 85,000 people were affected 400 schemes closed with deficitsThey were shut between 1997 and 2005Only limited compensation is available from the Financial Assistance SchemeThe Pension Protection Fund only covers schemes from April 2005
Mr Justice Bean ruled that Pensions Minister John Hutton had no right to reject the Parliamentary Ombudsman's report in its entirety.Mr Justice Bean ruled that Pensions Minister John Hutton had no right to reject the Parliamentary Ombudsman's report in its entirety.
The ruling means that the government will now have to think again about whether to compensate the people who have lost their pensions from public funds.The ruling means that the government will now have to think again about whether to compensate the people who have lost their pensions from public funds.
Ombudsman's reportOmbudsman's report
The judicial review was an attempt to compel the government to abide by the Ombudsman's rulings.The judicial review was an attempt to compel the government to abide by the Ombudsman's rulings.
Ann Abraham published her report in March 2006.Ann Abraham published her report in March 2006.
She said that the government's maladministration had "caused injustice to a large number of people who, as a result, lost the opportunity to make informed choices about their future".She said that the government's maladministration had "caused injustice to a large number of people who, as a result, lost the opportunity to make informed choices about their future".
But the government has repeatedly argued that it was not at fault and it would be too expensive to pay full compensation.But the government has repeatedly argued that it was not at fault and it would be too expensive to pay full compensation.
The government has estimated the total cost of paying compensation at £15bn, but campaigners for people who have lost their pensions say the true cost would be much lower.The government has estimated the total cost of paying compensation at £15bn, but campaigners for people who have lost their pensions say the true cost would be much lower.