• GL
Choose your location?
  • Global Global
  • Australia
  • France
  • Germany
  • Ireland
  • Italy
  • Poland
  • Qatar
  • Spain
  • UAE
  • UK

BT fails to switch pension increases from RPI to CPI

26 January 2018
The High Court concludes proposed switch from RPI to CPI is not valid on the basis that RPI has not " become inappropriate" as a measure of increase.


  • The case concerned a section of the pension scheme where the rules required pensions to be increased in line with RPI, or if this "becomes inappropriate" such other measure agreed by BT with the Trustee. 
  • Like many employers, BT sought to switch from RPI to CPI to reduce the scheme deficit. 
  • The High Court ruled the proposed switch was not valid.   
  • External industry views on the general "appropriateness" of RPI are of limited relevance where RPI is hard coded into pension scheme rules.   


The Court decided it was an objective question for the Court to determine whether RPI had become inappropriate. 

The ordinary meaning of "becomes inappropriate" set a high hurdle to overcome. For example, if RPI was universally regarded as inappropriate for all other uses, but remained appropriate for measuring pension increases, it would nevertheless remain appropriate for the purpose of the increase rule i.e. to protect pensions against increases in the cost of living. 

The Court considered the criticisms levelled at RPI and the fact the government has abandoned the formula as an official measure of inflation. But the Court concluded this did not make RPI inappropriate for the purpose of increasing pensions. In particular, the Court noted:

  • the flaws in RPI relied upon by BT were known when the increase rule was introduced; and 
  • there was evidence CPI might under-estimate inflation which would lead to a material risk to pensioners, contrary to the purpose of the increase rule. 


The fact that jettisoning RPI would have led to a material risk for the pensioners demonstrates the Court's openness in considering more generally the protective purpose of the increase rule. 

Trustees managing schemes with pension increase provisions that adopt similar wording should consider whether RPI is wholly inappropriate to increase pensions and not merely less appropriate than an alternative measure. Trustees need to assess the primary purpose of the increase rule, without regard to wider views about RPI.

Much like the test for "replacement" in Barnardo's it seems that finding RPI to be "inappropriate" will be a very difficult test to meet short of RPI being discontinued altogether.

We use cookies to give you the best user experience on our website. Please let us know if you accept our use of cookies.

Manage cookies

Your Privacy

When you visit any web site, it may store or retrieve information on your browser, mostly in the form of cookies. We mainly use this information to ensure the site works as you expect it to, and to learn how we can improve the experience in the future. The information does not usually directly identify you, but it can give you a more personalised web experience.
Because we respect your right to privacy, you can choose not to allow some types of cookies. Click on the different category headings to find out more and change permissions. However, blocking some types of cookies may prevent certain site functionality from working as expected

Functional cookies


These cookies let you use the website and are required for the website to function as expected.

These cookies are required

Tracking cookies

Anonymous cookies that help us understand the performance of our website and how we can improve the website experience for our users. Some of these may be set by third parties we trust, such as Google Analytics.

They may also be used to personalise your experience on our website by remembering your preferences and settings.

Marketing cookies

These cookies are used to improve and personalise your experience with our brands. We may use these cookies to show adverts for our products, or measure the performance of our adverts.