‘A recent Court of Appeal decision committing car company Honda to between £47 million and £70m in additional pension scheme benefits due to a mistake in one of the documents is “another lesson in the importance of getting pension scheme documents right”, an expert has said.’
OUT-LAW.com, 23rd April 2014
Source: www.out-law.com
Briggs and others v Gleeds (Head Office) and others [2014] EWHC 1178 (Ch); [2014] WLR (D) 174
‘A representation of law could found an estoppel by representation. Estoppel could not be invoked where a document did not even appear to comply with the requirements of section 1(3) of the Law of Property (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1989 on its face or where a document needed to be executed by partners and was stated to be signed, sealed and delivered by each partner but none of those signatures were witnessed. Accordingly members of a pension scheme were not estopped from denying that defective deeds were validly executed.’
WLR Daily, 15th April 2014
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
‘Jessica Craigs, senior solicitor, and David Salter, Joint Head of Family Law, both of Mills & Reeve LLP analyse the financial remedies and divorce news and cases published in March.’
Family Law Week, 11th April 2014
Source: www.familylawweek.co.uk
Supreme Court, 26th February 2014
Forde and McHugh Ltd v Revenue and Customs Commissioners [2014] UKSC 14; [2014] WLR (D) 99
‘Contributions made by a company into a funded unapproved retirement benefits scheme in favour of one of its directors did not constitute the director’s “earnings” for the purposes of section 6(1) of the Social Security Contributions and Benefits Act 1992 and thus the company was not liable to pay national insurance contributions in respect of the value of the contribution.’
WLR Daily, 26th February 2014
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
‘Having a pension fund itself would make most people happy, but liberating one makes it sound even more enticing and for some poor people, too enticing by half as they fall victim to the new fraud which is in vogue at the moment, pension liberation.’
Six Pump Court, 20th February 2014
Source: www.6pumpcourt.co.uk
‘Considerations of fairness and reasonableness could not be imported into the process of construing the provisions of a Levy Determination issued by the Pension Protection Fund (“PPF”) which set out, pursuant to section 175(5) of the Pensions Act 2004, the rules for calculating the annual levy on defined pension benefit schemes eligible to receive compensation from the PPF. If the relevant rule in the Levy Determination did not permit the board of the PPF to interfere in any individual case so as to procure what might be said to be fair or rational in the calculation of the levy, the ombudsman was similarly constrained on a reference.’
WLR Daily, 23rd January 2014
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
‘In ancillary relief proceedings, the largest assets are frequently the divorcing couple’s matrimonial home and pension rights. Whilst it is usually straightforward to ascertain the value of the former, accurately achieving this for the latter can be a highly technical exercise. Solicitors’ alleged failure to analyse pension transfer values is the subject of a spate of negligence claims currently being brought by former clients. No case is yet to be reported, but it is expected that a number will be during 2014.’
Hardwicke Chambers, 13th January 2014
Source: www.hardwicke.co.uk
‘Where the revenue gave notice of its withdrawal of approval of a pension scheme under section 591B(1) of the Income and Corporation Taxes Act 1988, the date for the purposes of section 591C(1) when the charge to tax arose in respect of that scheme was the date when approval of the scheme was withdrawn and not the date from which approval ceased to continue.’
WLR Daily, 19th December 2013
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
“Today [22 October] the Law Commission publishes a consultation paper reviewing how ‘fiduciary duties’ apply to investment intermediaries. The paper traces a chain of intermediaries from an individual, saving for a pension, to the registered shareholder of a UK company. It looks at the obligations of those in the chain to act in the interests of savers.”
Law Commission, 22nd October 2013
Source: www.lawcommission.justice.gov.uk
“Consultation reviewing the obligations on investment intermediaries to act in the interests of savers.”
Law Commission, 22nd October 2013
Source: www.justice.gov.uk/lawcommission
“A number of pension schemes which allowed members to access their savings before the minimum retirement age should be classed as ‘occupational’ schemes, the High Court has ruled.”
OUT-LAW.com, 22nd October 2013
Source: www.out-law.com
“On the proper interpretation of article 28(2)(b) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 of 14 June 1971 on the application of social security schemes to employed persons, to self-employed persons and to members of their families moving within the Community, (as amended), ‘legislation’ to which a pensioner had been subject for the longest period of time, for the purpose of that provision, referred to legislation concerning pensions.”
WLR Daily, 10th October 2013
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
“The principle of non-discrimination on grounds of age, enshrined in article 21 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and given specific expression by Council Directive 2000/78/EC of 27 November 2000 establishing a general framework for equal treatment in employment and occupation, and, in particular, articles 2 and 6(1) of that Directive, did not preclude an occupational pension scheme under which an employer paid, as part of pay, pension contributions which increased with age, provided that the difference in treatment on grounds of age that arose therefrom was appropriate and necessary to achieve a legitimate aim.”
WLR Daily, 26th September 2013
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
“OK, so the title perhaps implies that what follows is more interesting than it is. However, the most recent decision of the Supreme Court in the Nortel/Lehman litigation is of considerable importance for all of us, particularly in the current economic climate.”
Hardwicke Chambers, 23rd September 2013
Source: www.hardwicke.co.uk
Pensionsversicherungsanstalt v Brey (Case C-140/12); [2013] WLR (D) 352
“European Union law—in particular, articles 7(1)(b), 8(4) and 24(1) and (2) of Parliament and Council Directive 2004/38/EC of 29 April 2004 on the right of citizens of the Union and their family members to move and reside freely within the territory of the member states—precluded national legislation which, even in relation to the period following the first three months of residence, automatically barred the grant of a social security benefit to a national of another member state who was not economically active, on the grounds that, despite having been issued with a certificate of residence, he did not meet the necessary requirements for obtaining the legal right to reside on the territory of the first member state for a period of longer than three months, since obtaining that right of residence was conditional upon that national having sufficient resources not to apply for the benefit.”
WLR Daily, 19th September 2013
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
“Low contributions remain the ‘real obstacle’ to the success of the Government’s workplace pension scheme reforms following the Office of Fair Trading’s (OFT’s) review of the defined contribution (DC) pensions market, an expert has said.”
OUT-LAW.com, 19th September 2013
Source: www.out-law.com
“Around 10,000 victims of the Equitable Life scandal will receive a £5,000 compensation payment a year early, the Government has announced.”
Daily Telegraph, 10th September 2013
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
“It would be ‘unprincipled’ to allow administrators of an insolvent company to use money ring-fenced for the purposes of its underfunded pension scheme to settle their debt to the scheme’s trustees, the High Court has ruled.”
OUT-LAW.com, 2nd August 2013
Source: www.out-law.com
“The Supreme Court ruled today that sums claimed under a Financial Support Direction of the Pensions
Regulator that is issued after a company’s entry to insolvency will rank as provable debts. It disagreed with both the High Court and a unanimous Court of Appeal, which had held that sums claimed under such a FSD were payable as insolvency expenses. The Supreme Court also rejected an argument that such a claim ranked below ordinary creditors as a non-provable liability.”
Full story (PDF)
11 Stone Buildings, 24th July 2013
Source: www.11sb.com
© Inner Temple Library 2025