Briggs JSC said: ‘the Deed exists primarily for the benefit of non-parties, that is the employees upon whom pension rights are conferred whether as members or potential members of the Scheme, and upon members of their families (for example in the event of their death). It is therefore a context which is inherently antipathetic to the recognition, by way of departure from plain language, of some common understanding between the principal employer and the trustee, or common dictionary which they may have employed, or even some widespread practice within the pension industry which might illuminate, or give some strained meaning to, the words used.’
Briggs JSC, Longmore, Floyd LJJ
[2017] EWCA Civ 1482, [2018] Pens LR 2
Bailii
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – 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 . .
See Also – Safeway Ltd v Newton and Others CA 13-Jul-2020
Determining Normal Pension Ages under occupational pension scheme. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 13 October 2021; Ref: scu.595817