Waterford Crystal’s case wasn’t the first time pension schemes and their protection was called into question.
The Irish case was constructed off the back of an English version that was successfully put before the courts by Carol Robins.
She fought against the British government after a company’s insolvency left her with only 49 percent of her pension – at that time UK citizens were entitled to receive 90 percent of their accrued pension entitlements when faced with their company’s insolvency.
Referencing Article 8 of European Directive 2008/94, Carol argued that as it is designed to ensure that workers’ pensions are protected if a company goes bust, she should be entitled to her full amount.
The article doesn’t require any proof of reasons for the failure of said company or why a pension fund would find itself being declared insolvent.
Slammed for causing distress and uncertainty, the State faced backlash over their contesting of what should have been an open and shut case – something Carol’s Irish counterparts banked on their State wanting to avoid to aid their positive ruling.