header-logo header-logo

25 January 2016
Issue: 7685 / Categories: Movers & Shakers
printer mail-detail

M&S PROFILE: Philippa Connaughton

p_connaught_low_res_0005

The Sackers pension partner on the fight to achieve justice for armed forces' widows

Pensions expert Philippa Connaughton recently joined Sackers from RPC.

What has been your biggest career challenge so far?

In 2014 I was contacted by  Major General John Moore-Bick CBE DL, the then General Secretary of the Forces Pension Society in connection with the Society’s "Justice For Widows" campaign.  They were seeking to remove an archaic provision in the Armed Forces Pension Scheme 75 rules which stopped the continued payment of armed forces’ widow’s pensions for those who chose to co-habit or remarry. Together with the Royal British Legion, senior military personnel, the well-known household names of Kate Adie, Martin Bell and Joanna Lumley, and with backing from Dr Ros Altmann,  the campaign had been gathering momentum with an open letter to The Times published in April 2014.  

Despite the incredible drive and sheer charisma of those leading the campaign, they were coming up against a legal problem. The campaigners were being told that it was not legally possible to make a rule change retrospectively (for those widows already in receipt of pensions) and that even were it possible this would be resisted by government due to the legal precedent it would set, and the knock-on effect it might have on other  public sector schemes.  

My challenge: to help the Justice for Widow’s campaign challenge and overturn government “legal” thinking. In preparing my advice, I discovered the little known Pension and Yeomanry Pay Act 1884 under which the AFPS 75 was established and pored over numerous public sector rules, and I’m told that the advice eventually found its way on to the prime minister’s desk. It was a great honour to play my (small) part in the success of the Justice for Widows campaign. The archaic AFPS 75 rule was changed on 1 April 2015 and impacts 46,000 current Armed Forces widows and potentially up to 350,000 current wives. The biggest challenge of my career has proved to be the singular most rewarding.  

If you weren’t a lawyer, what would you choose as an alternate career?

I’d be an archaeologist. As a child I dug up most of my parents’ garden in Cheshire searching for artefacts and I remain fascinated as to how our ancestors lived their daily lives. These days I have to content myself with re-runs of Time Team and occasional trips to the Museum of London, which contains a fascinating collection of recent finds from excavations in and around London.

Who is your favourite fictional lawyer?

Horace Rumpole, the wonderful creation of the late Sir John Mortimer QC. A liberal free-thinking defence lawyer who loved the drama of the court room and was rather anti-establishment—his antics always make me smile. 

How do you relax?

Playing the piano, skiing and playing (competitive) board games with the family. I’ve recently taken up the violin (again) after a break of 25 years. Whether it proves to be as relaxing for the family as it is for me remains to be seen!

 

Issue: 7685 / Categories: Movers & Shakers
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Cripps—Radius Law

Cripps—Radius Law

Commercial and technology practice boosted by team hire

Switalskis—Grimsby

Switalskis—Grimsby

Firm expands with new Grimsby office to serve North East Lincolnshire

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Property team boosted by two solicitor appointments

NEWS
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
Recent allegations surrounding Peter Mandelson and Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor have reignited scrutiny of the ancient common law offence of misconduct in public office. Writing in NLJ this week, Simon Parsons, teaching fellow at Bath Spa University, asks whether their conduct could clear a notoriously high legal hurdle
A landmark ruling has reshaped child clinical negligence claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Jodi Newton, head of birth and paediatric negligence at Osbornes Law, explains how the Supreme Court in CCC v Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2026] UKSC 5 has overturned Croke v Wiseman, ending the long-standing bar on children recovering ‘lost years’ earnings
A Court of Appeal ruling has drawn a firm line under party autonomy in arbitration. Writing in NLJ this week, Masood Ahmed, associate professor at the University of Leicester, analyses Gluck v Endzweig [2026] EWCA Civ 145, where a clause allowing arbitrators to amend an award ‘at any time’ was held incompatible with the Arbitration Act 1996
back-to-top-scroll