BT Pension Scheme Trustees Limited & Ors (R on the application of) v UK Statistics Authority & Anor

The UK Statistics Authority may make fundamental changes to the Retail Prices Index under the Statistics and Registration Service Act 2007, including adopting the methodology and data sources of another existing index. The statute does not preserve any immutable feature of the RPI, such as its historical methodology, its differential from the CPIH, or a particular investment return.

The Authority’s statutory functions concern the quality, methodology, comprehensiveness and public usefulness of official statistics. They do not require it to weigh the competing financial effects of changing an index on pensioners, investors, businesses or the public finances. A consultation need not extend beyond the lawful scope of the decision-maker’s functions. A gilt cessation clause is triggered only if the RPI ceases to be published, not merely because it undergoes a fundamental change.

Five pension scheme trustees challenged decisions concerning the future of the United Kingdom General Index of Retail Prices. The UK Statistics Authority decided to align the RPI with the methods and data sources of the CPIH from 2030. The Chancellor of the Exchequer withheld consent to implementation before 2030 and decided that compensation would not be paid to holders of index-linked gilts.

The claimants alleged that the RPI decision was ultra vires, that the defendants failed to consider material effects and comply with the Public Sector Equality Duty, and that the consultation was unlawful. They also sought a declaration that implementation would trigger cessation clauses in post-2005 gilts. The central issues were the scope of the Authority’s statutory power and functions, the consultation obligations, and the proper construction of the cessation clause.

1. Judicial review dismissed. The Authority’s decision to import the CPIH methodology and data sources into the RPI was within section 21 of the Statistics and Registration Service Act 2007.
2. The RPI is an index measuring consumer price inflation which has evolved through successive changes. Parliament did not prescribe immutable characteristics, a particular formula, a particular coverage, or the continuation of the historical “wedge” between the RPI and CPIH. The power to make fundamental changes permits the Authority to adopt an existing index, or to make several interrelated changes together, provided the resulting index remains officially recognisable as the United Kingdom General Index of Retail Prices and is capable of being maintained and published.
3. Section 21 must be read with section 7. The Authority’s functions concern the quality, methodology, good practice and comprehensiveness of official statistics. The Authority was not required to identify and balance all winners and losers resulting from the RPI’s use in pensions, gilts, taxation, fares, student loans or commercial arrangements. Those policy consequences fall to the bodies making or regulating the relevant arrangements, and ultimately to Parliament.
4. The Authority therefore lawfully treated the wider effects on legacy users as outside its statutory functions. The related Public Sector Equality Duty challenge fell away. The Chancellor’s compensation decision was also lawful: he had received extensive briefing on the effects, compensation proposals and the differential impact on women, and acted within the range permitted by judicial review.
5. The consultation on implementation method and timing was not required to address matters outside the Authority’s functions. The exceptional procedural-expectation principle did not apply because the effects were general and diverse, rather than pressing and focused. The delay in challenging the scope of the consultation independently justified refusal of an extension of time.
6. The cessation clause in post-2005 gilts protects against the RPI ceasing to be published. It does not protect a particular rate of return and is not triggered by a fundamental change to the RPI. The Chancellor was entitled to a declaration that implementation of the RPI decision in or after 2030 would not trigger the clause.