Trustees of the appellant charity’s pension scheme sought to sanction the base against which pensions would be uprated under the scheme from a link to the Retail Prices Index, to a link to the Consumer Prices Index.
Held: Lewison and McFarlane LJJ, Vos LJ dissenting, the appeal was dismissed. Lewison LJ summarised the principal question in the appeal in this way:
‘The critical words in the definition of the RPI are ‘or any replacement adopted by the Trustees without prejudicing Approval.’ Does the definition mean:
(i) the RPI or any index that replaces the RPI and is adopted by the trustees; or
(ii) the RPI or any index that is adopted by the trustees as a replacement for the RPI?’
Sir Terence Etherton Ch, McFarlane, Lewison LJJ
[2016] EWCA Civ 1064, [2017] Pens LR 2
Bailii
England and Wales
Cited by:
Appeal from – Barnardo’s v Buckinghamshire and Others SC 7-Nov-2018
The Court considered the interpretation of a clause in a pension scheme trust deed which defines the phrase ‘Retail Prices Index’ and which allows the trustees of the pension scheme to adopt a ‘replacement’ of the officially published Retail Prices . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 12 October 2021; Ref: scu.570871
