The rules of a pensions scheme were altered. It was required that any such alteration be in writing, but the trustees had not signed the document creating the amendment.
Held: The words ‘writing under hand’ clearly required a signature, and the amendment was ineffective. No estoppel arose as against the members: ‘An avoidance of pedantry, and the need to protect beneficiaries may well be powerful factors in choosing between rival constructions; but once the requirements of a valid means of alteration of the rules has been determined as a matter of construction, either a document satisfies those requirements or it does not.’ and ‘it was a substantive requirement of a document amending the rules that it was signed by the trustees and by or on behalf of the company. Since, in my judgment, the court has no power to authorise a departure from the rules, or to waive one of their requirements, it follows that the rules have never been validly amended. ‘
As to the estoppel, a group estoppel was alleged, saying that the amendments had been given effect since 1991. In fact those who had left the scheme, and who might have asserted the estoppel had been treated as if the amendment had not been made, and ‘the entitlement to pension of members who have the right to retire for part of their service and who had attained the age of 60 at the date of winding up falls within section 73 (3) (b) of the Pensions Act 1995. ‘
Lewison J
[2006] EWHC 1426 (Ch), [2006] Pens LR 177, [2007] 1 All ER 308, [2007] ICR 412, [2006] PLR 177, Times 07-Aug-2006
Bailii
Pensions Act 1995 73
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Barber v Guardian Royal Exchange Assurance Group ECJ 17-May-1990
Europa The benefits paid by an employer to a worker on the latter’s redundancy constitute a form of pay to which the worker is entitled in respect of his employment, which is paid to him upon termination of the . .
Cited – Coloroll Pension Trustees v Russell and others (Judgment) ECJ 28-Sep-1994
The trustees of a pension fund have the same equal treatment obligations as do employers. The effect of the judgment in Barber was that: ‘i) For pensionable service prior to 17 May 1990 (the date of the Barber judgment) it was not unlawful for male . .
Cited – Bestrustees v Stuart 2001
The court considered the validity of a purported alteration in the rules of a pension scheme. It was said to have altered the rules in accordance with a power of alteration contained in clause 16 of the scheme under consideration.
Held: ‘I . .
Cited – Everard v Paterson CEC 1816
The plaintiff sued on a bond which was conditional on performance of an arbitrators’ award ‘made in writing under their hands’. The pleading alleged that the arbitrators had made and published their award in writing; but it did not allege that the . .
Cited – Chadwick v Clarke CCC 1845
The plaintiff and defendant were directors of an insurance company. The board resolved to rent a house from Mr Chadwick for one year. A memorandum of agreement was prepared and agreed, but it was never signed. The memorandum recorded an agreement to . .
Cited – Technocrats International Inc v Fredic Ltd QBD 23-Nov-2004
The court was asked to consider the effectiveness of an unsigned assignment of a chose in action: ‘An assignment is only a legal assignment if it complies with s.136 of the 1925 Act. What that section requires is that there should be an ‘absolute . .
Cited – Redrow Plc v Pedley and Lewis ChD 12-Feb-2002
The company had a final salary pension scheme. The respondents were variously trustees of the scheme, and representative employees. To calculate benefits, it was necessary to determine the ‘total remuneration from the Employers’. The employees . .
Cited – Amalgamated Investment and Property Co Ltd (in Liq) v Texas Commerce International Bank Ltd CA 1982
The court explained the nature of an estoppel by convention.
Lord Denning MR said: ‘The doctrine of estoppel is one of the most flexible and useful in the armoury of the law. But it has become overloaded with cases. That is why I have not gone . .
Cited – Chadwick v Clarke CCC 1845
The plaintiff and defendant were directors of an insurance company. The board resolved to rent a house from Mr Chadwick for one year. A memorandum of agreement was prepared and agreed, but it was never signed. The memorandum recorded an agreement to . .
Cited – Waterson’s Trustees v St Giles Boys’ Club IHCS 1943
The House considered a testamentary direction by the testatrix to give effect to any ‘informal writing under my hand’. At her death she left holograph directions, but they were not subscribed with a signature.
Held: This document was not . .
Cited – Steria Ltd and others v Hutchison and others ChD 21-Dec-2005
. .
Cited – Hearn v Younger 2005
. .
Cited – Icarus (Hertford) Ltd v Driscoll ChD 1990
. .
Cited – Hoover Ltd v Hetherington ChD 2002
. .
Cited – ITN v Ward ChD 1997
. .
Cited – Lansing Linder Ltd v Alber ChD 2000
Pension scheme rules were amended varying the ages etc for retirement. The rules gave the company power to amend the rules with the consent of the Trustees. The original rules permitted early retirement on an immediate, but actuarially reduced, . .
Cited by:
Appeal from – Trustee Solutions Ltd and others v Dubery and Another CA 26-Jul-2007
When apportioning the assets of a pension fund on its winding up under the statutory scheme, the trustees had to take careful note of the differing historic retirement ages throught the scheme and between men and women. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Estoppel, Discrimination, Financial Services, Insolvency
Updated: 08 January 2022; Ref: scu.242661
