Judgment: 2026-01-12 · Court archive

Retired Mayo County Council worker wins High Court pension case over overtime

High Court · [2026] IEHC 4

Who, what, where, when and why

Who
  • Padraig Browne
  • Mayo County Council
  • Mr Justice Garrett Simons
What

Retired Mayo County Council worker wins High Court pension case over overtime

Where

Places mentioned in the report

  • Mayo County Council
  • Machinery yard near Newport
When

Judgment:

Why

Reasons reported in the judgment

A retired Mayo County Council worker has won a High Court case over the calculation of his pension after the court found that nine hours of overtime per week should have been included as pensionable pay.

A retired Mayo County Council worker has won a High Court case over the calculation of his pension after the court found that nine hours of overtime per week should have been included as pensionable pay.

Padraig Browne, now aged 83, worked for Mayo County Council for almost 50 years before retiring in February 2008. In his final years he was a deputy foreman at the council’s machinery yard near Newport and mainly drove a three-axle tipper truck delivering materials for road works and replenishing stockpiles across the county.

Mr Justice Garrett Simons found that Browne regularly worked substantial overtime and that, for 95% of working weeks in his final three years excluding annual leave, he performed at least nine overtime hours.

The court held that those nine hours met the conditions in a ministerial circular governing when overtime can count towards local authority pensions. Browne had been required to begin work at 7am, an hour before normal working hours, and his finishing time depended on completing deliveries and returning the truck to the machinery yard.

The judge found the overtime was compulsory, regular and recurring, formed part of Browne’s employment and had to be performed outside normal hours to support road construction and repair work.

Mayo County Council had argued that overtime was voluntary and that the claim was barred by earlier proceedings before the pensions ombudsman and by limitation rules. The High Court rejected those arguments. It found there had never been a formal ombudsman determination and that each underpayment of Browne’s pension amounted to a continuing breach.

Browne can therefore recover pension shortfalls from October 2014 onwards, potentially with interest, and is entitled to an increased pension in future. Any claim relating to the lump sum paid on his retirement in 2008 is statute-barred.

The precise calculation of the arrears and interest was left for further submissions.

Read the original court judgment

Something looks wrong?

Highlight the relevant passage or flag this article for review. Review requests do not immediately change the report.

Email a correction request

Request a review