Bank of New Zealand v Board of Management of the Bank of New Zealand Officers’ Provident Association: PC 14 Jul 2003

PC (New Zealand) The defendant operated a superannuation scheme for and on behalf of the officers of the bank it regulated. The trustees ought to amend the scheme, but it had been set up by statute.
Held: When assessing such amendments to see whether they remained within the purposes of the original scheme as set up, the court was not limited to express statements made in the founding documents.


Lord Hoffmann, Lord Hobhouse of Woodborough, Lord Millett, Lord Walker of Gestingthorpe, Sir Andrew Leggatt


[2003] UKHL 58


Bailii, PC


CitedIn re Courage Group’s Pension Schemes Ryan v Imperial Brewing and Leisure Ltd ChD 1987
It was possible to amend the provisions of a pension scheme provided the amendments did not conflict with the purposes of the scheme. How was a court to identify such purposes: ‘It is trite law that a power can be exercised only for the purpose for . .
CitedMettoy Pension Trustees v Evans ChD 1990
Where a trustee acts under a discretion given to him by the terms of the trust the court will interfere with his action if it is clear that he would not have so acted as he did had he not failed to take into account considerations which he ought to . .
CitedIn re Locker’s Settlement Meachem v Sachs 1977
The court considered how the trustees of a pension scheme could appropriate different parts of the funds as between long standing and new classes of members.
Held: Objects (that is, those who had only recently qualified as beneficiaries) could . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.


Updated: 07 June 2022; Ref: scu.184658