The proverbial penny drops landing on both sides: Let's talk about pensions 
Expires after 90 days
CPD Hours: 1
Please note: this lecture was originally a part of the LAW2021 Online: Family Law (Spring) virtual event. The recorded edition of the event is still available, providing a 6-hour package for only £149+vat. Click here for the full description.
Three recent decisions - W v H (divorce financial remedies)  EWFC B10, KM v CV (Pension Apportionment: Needs)  EWFC B22 and RH v SV (Pension Apportionment: Reasons)  EWFC B23 are of significant interest due to the significant lack of reported cases involving pensions on divorce. They are also the first reported judicial treatment of the PAG report. Per His Honour Judge Hess, the PAG report should, 'be treated as being prima facie persuasive in the areas it has analysed, although of course susceptible to judicial oversight and criticism'.
Between the three cases there is to be found an interesting analysis of the court's approach to apportionment/ring-fencing, Lifetime Allowance ('LTA') treatment and offsetting.
Judge Robinson, taking a broad view of pension offsetting, comments in RH v SV that:
' I do not consider that there is anything inherently wrong with aggregating the value of capital and pension assets for the purpose of comparison, provided that it is recognised that this is not a comparison of equal values. Provided it is recognised that the orchard provides different types of fruit it is not wrong to look at the division of the total crop. The continuing income position must also be considered in assessing fairness'.
This lecture shall discuss apportionment, LTA offsetting and the continuing role of annuities in pension reports.