This article is from the source 'bbc' and was first published or seen on . It will not be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/rss/-/1/hi/uk/7485050.stm

The article has changed 6 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 1 Version 2
Gurkhas lose pension court battle Gurkhas lose pension court battle
(10 minutes later)
Three ex-Gurkha soldiers have lost a High Court challenge to the British government over a pensions deal.Three ex-Gurkha soldiers have lost a High Court challenge to the British government over a pensions deal.
Kumar Shrestha, Kamal Purja and Sambahadur Gurung said they had been treated unlawfully and unfairly.Kumar Shrestha, Kamal Purja and Sambahadur Gurung said they had been treated unlawfully and unfairly.
They said years of service for Gurkhas who signed up before July 2007 but retired after that date were valued at between 24% and 36% of British rates.They said years of service for Gurkhas who signed up before July 2007 but retired after that date were valued at between 24% and 36% of British rates.
But Mr Justice Ouseley ruled that the Ministry of Defence's pension valuation had been "justified and proportionate".But Mr Justice Ouseley ruled that the Ministry of Defence's pension valuation had been "justified and proportionate".
'Theatres of war'
The court battle followed an offer by the MoD in March 2007 to transfer Gurkhas' pensions from the existing Gurkha Pension Scheme (GPS) into one of the mainstream Armed Forces Pension Schemes (AFPS).
The three men involved in bringing the case argued that the deal discriminated against them on the grounds of age.
Gurkhas, who come from Nepal, have served in the British army for more than 200 years and have won 13 Victoria crosses.
Solicitor Philippa Tuckman, of law firm Bolt Burdon Kemp, who represented the three men, said she was "saddened" by the result and intended to appeal.
"Gurkhas have served in theatres of war, in danger and in hardship.
"They should be valued for it, not penalised."