Waspi campaigners say they have secured a vital legal safeguard in their bid for a High Court challenge.
The Women Against State Pension Inequality (Waspi) group is seeking a judicial review to force the Government to reconsider its decision to rule out a compensation package for women affected by the way changes to the state pension age were communicated.
On Monday, Waspi said a limit has been placed on the campaign’s liability for Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) defence costs.
Waspi said the DWP had agreed to a costs capping order, protecting each side in the event they lose.
The campaigners previously said they had received an update to say that their case is arguable, setting them on course for a court hearing.
A previous report by the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman (PHSO) suggested compensation ranging between £1,000 and £2,950 could be appropriate for each of those affected.
But in December 2024, the Government said that, while it accepted the ombudsman’s finding of maladministration and apologised for there being a delay in writing to 1950s-born women, a blanket compensation scheme, which could cost taxpayers up to £10.5 billion, cannot be justified.
Campaigners submitted arguments in February for a legal case challenging the decision not to compensate women.
Waspi said the capping agreement limits its liability for Government legal costs to £60,000.
But campaigners are continuing to ask supporters to contribute to its legal “fighting fund,” saying they must raise enough to cover not only the capped costs, but those of the legal team fighting the case.
Angela Madden, chairwoman of Waspi, said: “Without this safeguard, we faced a real risk of financial ruin – of effectively being silenced by the threat of Government legal bills running into hundreds of thousands of pounds.
“We now have the certainty we need to press on – but the costs of fighting this case remain very real.”
She added: “This is the fight of our lives.”
A DWP spokesperson said: “We do not comment on live litigation.
“We have apologised for there being a 28-month delay in writing to 1950s-born women.
“However, we do not agree with the ombudsman’s approach to injustice or remedy and that is why we have decided not to pay compensation.”
