South West Trains Ltd v Wightman and Others: ChD 14 Jan 1998

The trades’ union had agreed with the employer that what had been irregular and non-pensionable payments made to employees would, in future, be paid regularly, but that only certain parts of the payments become pensionable. The employer now sought to enforce that agreement, on the inception of a new scheme which it had to be no worse than the previous scheme.
Held: There was no reduction in benefit, so the agreement did not fall foul of the order protecting the benefits on the transfer. There was no conflict with any existing agreement, and the agreement operated to create an inplied obligation on the employee not to seek any further benefit under the pension scheme in respect of these payments. A collective agreement under which consolidation of earnings excluded the attachment of pension rights remained enforceable after transfer.


Neuberger J


Times 14-Jan-1998


Railways Pension Schemes Order 1994 (1994 1433), Pensions Act 1995 67


England and Wales


CitedParry v Cleaver HL 5-Feb-1969
PI Damages not Reduced for Own Pension
The plaintiff policeman was disabled by the negligence of the defendant and received a disablement pension. Part had been contributed by himself and part by his employer.
Held: The plaintiff’s appeal succeeded. Damages for personal injury were . .
CitedNational Coal Board v National Union of Mineworkers 1986
A collective agreement between employer and the recognised trades union was ‘inapt to become enforceable terms of an individual’s contract of employment.’ Such collective agreements may deal with the appropriate mechanisms for dealing with . .
CitedMihlenstedt v Barclays Bank International CA 1989
The company’s pension scheme provided that the trustees were to form an opinion as to the employee’s ability or otherwise to work. The plaintiff sought payment of an ill-health pension under the Bank Pension Scheme.
Held: A pension scheme . .
CitedHirachand Punamchand v Temple CA 1911
The defendant, a British army officer in India, had given a promissory note to the plaintiff moneylenders. Unable to pay, he suggested they apply to his father, Sir Richard Temple. In reply, Sir Richard Temple’s solicitors wrote saying they were . .
CitedMackay v Dick and Stevenson HL 1881
One party contracted to supply to the other ‘a steam navvy of novel construction’ on condition that it achieved a stipulated rate of excavation in stipulated circumstances. The purchaser did not make available the ‘opened up face’ that was necessary . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.


Updated: 13 April 2022; Ref: scu.89437