Year of Call:
Saul Margo specialises in pensions, employment and commercial work.
Recent pensions work includes a Part 8 (led by Andrew Spink QC) that raises issues relating to the closure of a scheme to future accrual and PPF compensation and (acting alone) claims for rectification (representing trustees and representative beneficiaries) as well as related professional negligence claims. He has been involved in some of the highest profile pensions cases over the last few years including IBM v Dalgleish and the GPG regulatory action. He is recommended in Chambers & Partners and Legal 500.
Recent employment work includes acting in the Court of Appeal in the disability discrimination case of Swansea University Pension Scheme Trustees v Williams (led by Keith Bryant QC) as well as representing a large cohort of claimants in Miller v Ministry of Justice (concerning the entitlement of fee-paid judges to a pension and other elements of pay) and numerous claims that are connected to this litigation, many of which have now reached either the EAT or the Court of Appeal. He is regularly instructed in complex and lengthy discrimination cases. He is described in Chambers & Partners as “Brilliant in his oral advocacy, and fearless.” As a result of his position on the Treasury B-Panel he has represented a wide variety of government departments across the whole spectrum of employment, pensions, commercial and public law matters.
Recent commercial work includes both advising and acting in cases involving the mis-selling of swaps, a claim brought in the High Court on behalf of 32 claimants alleging a contractual entitlement to a higher level pension contributions from their employer and acting in a complex professional negligence claim.
Saul has a first class degree from Cambridge in Philosophy.
Employment & Discrimination
Swansea University Pension & Assurance Scheme Trustees v Williams  IRLR 882
Successfully acted for the employer and trustees resisting an appeal in the Court of Appeal concerning a claim of disability discrimination relating to the calculation of ill health retirement benefits (led by Keith Bryant QC).
HD v Secretary of State for Defence  4 WLR 182
Acted for the Secretary of State in a case concerning the date from which a War Widow’s pension was payable.
Webber v Department for Education  ICR 198
Acted for the Department for Education on an appeal from the Pensions Ombudsman concerning the date on which time stopped running for the purposes of a restitutionary claim before the Ombudsman.
MoJ v Burton & Engel  IRLR 100
The MoJ appealed against the quantification of the payment for judgment writing in multi-day cases to which these part-time judges were held to be entitled. Saul successful represented the First Respondent.
Aarons v The Secretary of State for the Home Office: Challenges to the transitional protection under 2015 police pension reforms
Acting (for nearly 9000 (and counting) police officers in England, Wales and Scotland in a challenge to the transitional protection given to some officers. The claims being pursued are direct age discrimination, indirect race and sex discrimination and equal pay. The respondents are every police force (43 in England and Wales plus the Scottish force), the Home Secretary and the Scottish Ministers
Burton & Engel v MOJ  IRLR 100
Successfully represented the lead Claimant (a retired judge in the Residential Property Tribunal Service) in an appeal by the MoJ against the finding of the ET that the Claimants had been treated less favourably than full-time tax judges in relation to payments for writing judgments. This judgment binds the MoJ in relation to the claims of all judges within the same jurisdiction and is likely to cost the ministry a very large sum of money, as yet to be determined.
Eddie Stobart v Aikman
High Court proceedings concerning a breach of the implied term of trust and confidence in relation to pension benefits. A favourable settlement was reached before trial.
Edge & Burton v MOJ KEAT/0247/15
EAT case concerning the entitlement of the MOJ to contend that the claimants were not entitled to receive a judicial pensions as compensation for less favourable treatment under the PTWR.
Miller & Others v MOJ
Acted on behalf of approximately 80 judges with part-time service who are seeking to establish their entitlement to a pension referable to that service following the Judgment of the Supreme Court in the O’Brien litigation.
Yvonne Mills v London Borough of Brent (EAT)
Successful represented the Respondent in resisting an appeal which sought to overturn the ET’s decision to strike out the claim on the basis that it amounted to re-litigation of a claim that had been withdrawn. Allegations of bias on the part of the ET were also rejected by the EAT.
Spaceright Europe Limited v Baillavoine & Others  ICR 520
Successfully represented the Claimant in a case concerning the correct application of regulation 7 of the Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Regulations 2006. Saul was led by Keith Bryant in the Court of Appeal and acted on his own for Mr Baillavoine in the ET and the EAT.
Burns v Santander  IRLR 639
Successfully represented the Respondent in a case concerning whether the Claimant, who alleged he was wrongly remanded in custody, was entitled to be paid his wages while in custody.
St Ives Plymouth Limited v Haggerty (EAT)
Successfully represented the Claimant – the EAT upheld the Tribunal’s finding that she was an employee and there was the irreducible minimum of obligation between the parties.
Appointments & Memberships
- Denning Scholarship
Saul Margo is regulated by the Bar Standards Board (BSB) and holds a current practising certificate. If you are not satisfied with the service provided, please click here.
Areas of Law
- Commercial & Chancery
- Employment & Discrimination
- Financial Services
- Law In Sport
- Pensions & Trusts
- Professional Negligence
- Public Law
“He is extremely intelligent, pragmatic and helpful, and he has a really warm and charming manner with both solicitors and lay clients.” Pensions, Chambers & Partners 2018
“His strength is in the detail, he has a great memory and he is good at analysing how certain events could impact the bigger picture.” Pensions, Chambers & Partners 2018
“He has great memory recall and always considers the bigger picture.” Pensions, Legal 500 2017
“A passionate barrister with conviction.” Employment, Legal 500 2017
“Saul has been extremely good operating in a team of leading counsel and solicitors to conclude extremely complex cases to the clients’ satisfaction.” Pensions, Chambers & Partners 2017
“He is one to watch – an excellent tactician.” Employment, Chambers & Partners 2017
“He is conscientious and is always available at the end of the phone to deal with any questions as they arise.” Employment, Chambers & Partners 2017
“Bright, capable and attentive – one to watch.” Employment, Legal 500 2016
“A particularly engaging advocate. Very thorough and very convincing, and he uses his light touch to considerable effect.” Employment, Chambers & Partners 2016
“Brilliant in his oral advocacy, and fearless.” Employment, Chambers & Partners 2016
“Incredibly hard-working” with “a really sharp, accurate brain” and “a really good team player”. Pensions, Chambers & Partners 2016
“He is very knowledgeable and has got a good grasp of pensions matters.” “Incredibly hard-working, he has a really sharp, accurate brain and he works through issues quickly and impressively. He’s also a really good team player.” Pensions, Chambers & Partners 2015
“A junior of choice.” Pensions, Legal 500 2015
“We are impressed by the level of detail provided by Saul.” Pensions, Chambers & Partners 2014
“He provides excellent client care.” Pensions, Legal 500 2014