header-logo header-logo

Landmark pension ruling

16 July 2009
Issue: 7378 / Categories: Legal News , Employment
printer mail-detail

Employers can adopt pragmatic approach to pension equalisation

Pension lawyers have broadly welcomed a Court of Appeal ruling on pension schemes with mixed retirement dates.

In Foster Wheeler Ltd v Hanley and Ors [2009] EWCA Civ 651, the court held that members of the Foster Wheeler pension scheme with mixed retirement dates of 60 and 65 should be allowed to take all their benefits at an earlier age but with an actuarial reduction for the income that is paid early.

The court overturned an earlier high court ruling in November, which allowed members to take all their benefits without reduction at 60. Lady Justice Arden said this amounted to a “windfall” that was unfair on the company and other members. The company had argued for “split” pensions, where a member took some benefits at 60 and had to wait until 65 for the rest.

Robin Simmons, partner at niche pensions law firm, Sacker & Partners, says: “The appeal demonstrates the judiciary’s willingness to find ways to reach the ‘right’ solution. The High Court’s decision resulted in a windfall for certain members and the Court of Appeal was at pains to find a workaround within the confines of the scheme’s rules.

“It has succeeded in doing so on a construction of the particular scheme’s rules. Other possibilities—such as splitting periods of benefits—might work in other cases.”

Giles Orton, partner at Eversheds, says: “The Court of Appeal has told employers they can adopt pragmatic approaches to equalisation, with no need to allow members windfall bonuses where these are not required to comply with the basics of European discrimination law.

“Equalisation issues have proved very expensive to pension schemes over the years. Many members have been awarded extra benefits because trustees and employers have failed to equalise properly. In this case the courts appear to have recognised that pension schemes are already underfunded and set their face against further benefit windfalls.”

Issue: 7378 / Categories: Legal News , Employment
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Hugh James—Phil Edwards

Hugh James—Phil Edwards

Serious injury teambolstered by high-profile partner hire

Freeths—Melanie Stancliffe

Freeths—Melanie Stancliffe

Firm strengthens employment team with partner hire

DAC Beachcroft—Tim Barr

DAC Beachcroft—Tim Barr

Lawyers’ liability practice strengthened with partner appointment in London

NEWS
Ceri Morgan, knowledge counsel at Herbert Smith Freehills Kramer LLP, analyses the Supreme Court’s landmark decision in Johnson v FirstRand Bank Ltd, which reshapes the law of fiduciary relationships and common law bribery
The boundaries of media access in family law are scrutinised by Nicholas Dobson in NLJ this week
Reflecting on personal experience, Professor Graham Zellick KC, Senior Master of the Bench and former Reader of the Middle Temple, questions the unchecked power of parliamentary privilege
Geoff Dover, managing director at Heirloom Fair Legal, sets out a blueprint for ethical litigation funding in the wake of high-profile law firm collapses
James Grice, head of innovation and AI at Lawfront, explores how artificial intelligence is transforming the legal sector
back-to-top-scroll