Skip to main content
CLOSE

Charities

Close

Corporate and Commercial

Close

Employment and Immigration

Close

Fraud and Investigations

Close

Individuals

Close

Litigation

Close

Planning, Infrastructure and Regeneration

Close

Public Law

Close

Real Estate

Close

Restructuring and Insolvency

Close

Energy

Close

Entrepreneurs

Close

Private Wealth

Close

Real Estate

Close

Tech and Innovation

Close

Transport and Infrastructure

Close
Home / News and Insights / News / Pension scheme closure found effective in high court ruling

The trustee of the Wedgwood Pension Plan applied to the High Court for directions to determine whether the participating employers’ notices terminating their liability to contribute were effective to cease future accrual and to break the final salary link.

The scheme’s amendment power contained a fetter against amendments which prejudiced or adversely affected any pension or annuity then payable or the rights of any member.

The parties agreed that the fetter preserved a final salary link.

The Court considered two issues:

  1. the scope of the fetter on the amendment power
  2. whether a new rule which the participating employers had used to give the notices to terminate their liability to contribute to the scheme had been validly introduced. The predecessor rule had included a restriction which required the employer using the power to find that it is “impractical or inexpedient” for them to continue to participate in the scheme. The new rule did not contain such a restriction.

The Court held that the employers’ notices terminating their liability to contribute was effective to cease future accrual.

In relation to the first issue, the Court decided that the word “rights” did not cover benefits which might in the future be obtained as a result of future service with an employer.

On the second issue, the Court decided that the introduction of the new rule was valid but it fell foul of the amendment power fetter by prejudicing or adversely affected the right of members and, as such, it was subject to an implied limitation that notice of termination could not be validly given unless it was “impractical or inexpedient” for the employer to continue to participate. However, the Court found that, when exercising the power, the employers could have proved that it was impractical or expedient for them to continue to participate in the scheme.

The case is quite fact-specific. However, it is a useful reminder of the importance of considering any fetters on the amendment power when seeking to make an amendment to scheme rules.

Related Articles

Our Offices

London
One Bartholomew Close
London
EC1A 7BL

Cambridge
50/60 Station Road
Cambridge
CB1 2JH

Reading
The Anchorage, 34 Bridge Street
Reading RG1 2LU

Southampton
4 Grosvenor Square
Southampton SO15 2BE

 

Reading
The Anchorage, 34 Bridge Street
Reading RG1 2LU

Southampton
4 Grosvenor Square
Southampton SO15 2BE

  • Lexcel
  • CYBER ESSENTIALS PLUS

© BDB Pitmans 2024. One Bartholomew Close, London EC1A 7BL - T +44 (0)345 222 9222

Our Services

Charities chevron
Corporate and Commercial chevron
Employment and Immigration chevron
Fraud and Investigations chevron
Individuals chevron
Litigation chevron
Planning, Infrastructure and Regeneration chevron
Public Law chevron
Real Estate chevron
Restructuring and Insolvency chevron

Sectors and Groups

Private Wealth chevron
Real Estate chevron
Transport and Infrastructure chevron