6.
(4) Regulation 17(1), read in conjunction with 17(2), requires that the pensioner loses both ways in fluctuating exchange rate movements when his basic pension is converted into sterling for the purpose of calculating pension supplement;
(5) because the use of historical exchange rates to convert my
HK basic pension to sterling resulted in the value of my total HK pension for 1990/91 artificially exceeding my Annual Review Order entitlement (in fact, at current exchange rates it was less than that entitlement), no supplement was paid on my HK pension for that year. Instead, the fictitious "excess" was used to reduce the supplement on my Tanzanian pension, which is paid in sterling by the ODA and is supposed to be fully protected under the Public Officers' Pensions (Tanzania) Agreement 1976. Consequently, I received only £1,125.10 for 1990/91 instead of my Tanzanian Annual Review Order entitlement of £1,763.62.
The I persion!!
Prolachend
Therefore, Regulation 17(1) has the effect of being partial and unequal and is manifestly unjust.
Estoppel
18. The Crown Agents, in their letter of 6 July 1987 (paragraph 13 above), represented that an overseas pension would be protected in full from exchange rate fluctuations. The ODA, in their letter of
The
30 October 1991, denied the authority of this representation. principle of estoppel is that when an agent makes a representation of fact on which the recipient is intended to rely and on which he does rely to his detriment, the agent may then be estopped from denying the truth of the statement or from going back on the undertaking (de Smith's p.101). In the case Robertson v. Minister of Pensions (1949) KB 227, 232, Lord Denning said: "In my opinion if a government department in its dealings with a subject takes it upon itself to assume authority upon a matter with which he is concerned, he is entitled to rely upon it having the authority which it assumes. He does not know, and cannot be expected to know, the limits of its authority."
19. It is a matter for judicial decision whether the Crown Agents' representations were representations of law or fact. I did, however, rely on their representations to my detriment. Had I known in 1987 that my Hong Kong pension would be only partly protected from exchange rate fluctuations, I would have commuted my Hong Kong pension to the maximum permitted and so reduced the amount the ODA could claw back on my Tanzanian pension.
Judicial Remedies
20. I have presented the case showing that Regulation 17(1) of the Overseas Service (Pensions Supplement) Regulations 1977 is ultra vires the Pensions (Increase) Act 1971, in so far as it is applied to the conversion at historical exchange rates of the monthly basic pension payments, and seek a Declaratory Order to that effect.
21. Alternatively, I seek a Declaratory Order to estop the ODA from denying the Crown Agents' representations that an overseas pension would be protected in full from exchange rate fluctuations.
I seek damages to restore the value of my pensions from 16 August 1989 to the level of my Eritish public service counterparts.
22.
Frepared by:
R.E. Blanche, Hong Kong, 27.1.92
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.