New Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer partner Christopher Stothers and Arnold & Porter counsel Jacqueline Mulryne have helped a transgender woman win a legal challenge in the Court of Justice of the European Court (CJEU), after the UK Government refused to recognise her gender reassignment or to pay her state pension.

The woman, known only as 'MB', who underwent gender reassignment surgery in 1995, has won the right to be paid a state pension from the age of 60 – the retirement age for women at that time she first made her pension claim.

Stothers began working on the case with Mulryne on a pro bono basis in 2013 while at Arnold & Porter. He then continued working on it alongside Mulryne when he joined Freshfields earlier this month alongside a team of patent litigators from the US firm.

The duo worked alongside Lord Pannick QC of Blackstone Chambers and Kerry Bretherton QC of Tanfield Chambers on the long-running case.

The dispute arose after MB was refused a state pension by the Department of Work and Pensions (DWP) on turning 60, on the grounds she did not have a gender reassignment certificate and could only be paid the male pension at 65.

She had married and transitioned from male to female at a time when gender recognition certificates were only issued to people who were unmarried, and she not did not want to divorce or annul her marriage to obtain a certificate, due to her religious beliefs.

The DWP told her she would have to wait until she reached the male state pension age of 65, prompting her to sue the DWP for five years of her pension.

After the Court of Appeal rejected her claim, the case made its way to the Supreme Court, which in August 2016 referred the case to the CJEU for guidance.

The CJEU ruled yesterday (26 June) that the DWP had wrongly withheld MB's pension and that the applicable UK legislation constitutes direct discrimination based on sex.

Of the decision, Stothers and Mulryne said in a joint statement: "We are delighted with [the] judgment, which vindicates our client's determination to challenge the unlawful decision of the UK Government to refuse to recognise her change of gender or to pay her state pension. This had been a major effort for our law firms and the silks involved, to whom our thanks must go."