The British Medical Association, R (on the application of) v His Majesty's Treasury & Anor
[2024] EWCA Civ 355
Newell Trustees Limited v Newell Rubbermaid UK Services Limited & Anor
23 January 2024
[2024] EWHC 48 (Ch)
High Court
A pension plan was changed in 1992, moving younger members to a different type of pension. The court said the change was mostly okay, but needs a small fix to make sure everyone got fair amounts. It also said there was no illegal age discrimination because the change happened before that was against the law.
Key Facts
- •In 1992, members of the Newell Rubbermaid UK Pension Scheme were divided into three age groups (Under 40s, 40-44s, Over 45s) for a scheme restructuring.
- •Under 40s were automatically transferred to a money purchase section, while 40-44s had a choice and Over 45s remained in the final salary section.
- •The case concerns the validity of the transfer and conversion (Transfer and Conversion Issues) and potential age discrimination (Age Discrimination Issues).
- •The 1992 Deed, intended to implement the changes, and the 1993 Deed, which formalized them, are central to the case.
- •The original 1992 Deed is missing, leading to disputes over whether annexes were properly signed.
- •The Proviso in the 1979 Deed (the scheme's original governing document) is crucial, preventing amendments that prejudice accrued benefits.
- •The 40-44s' choice to transfer created potential extrinsic contracts, separate from the scheme's rules.
Legal Principles
Construction of pension scheme documents requires careful textual analysis, prioritizing the drafter's chosen language, but allowing for purposive construction where necessary.
De La Rue Plc v De La Rue Pension Trustee Ltd [2022] EWHC 48 (Ch)
In an executory trust, the court prioritizes the parties' intentions over a strict textual analysis of the words used.
Sackville-West v Viscount Holmesdale (1869-70) L.R. 4 HL 543
An interim deed can operate as an executory trust, even if the definitive deed is subsequently executed.
Imperial Foods Ltd v Jeeves (unreported, 27 January 1986) [2007] 08 PBLR
Extrinsic contracts can affect pension scheme entitlements if all elements of contract formation (offer, acceptance, intention, consideration, certainty) are met; informed consent is not a requirement.
Gleeds, Univar UK Ltd v Smith [2020] Pens LR 23
Provisos protecting accrued benefits prevent amendments that break the link to a member's final pensionable salary.
Courage, IMG, Gleeds
Direct age discrimination requires a showing that the discriminator acted 'because of' age; it can be justified if proportionate to a legitimate aim.
Equality Act 2010, sections 13, 61
A pension scheme's non-discrimination rule overrides any conflicting scheme provisions.
Equality Act 2010, section 61(3)
Temporal limitation provisions restricting the scope of age discrimination claims may be disapplied if incompatible with EU law; however, this depends on the relevant legislation and the timing of proceedings.
Walker v Innospec Ltd [2017] UKSC 47, Beattie, The Withdrawal Act, The Retained EU Law Act
Outcomes
The 1992 Deed validly established the money purchase section.
The court found sufficient evidence that the missing annexes were properly signed and attached. The 1992 Deed operated as an executory trust, and a strict textual analysis wasn't necessary.
The transfer and conversion of benefits were valid, subject to an underpin.
While the conversion itself didn't breach the Proviso, the failure to account for future salary increases in the transfer sums did. The court ordered an underpin to adjust transfer sums to reflect the final pensionable salary.
No unlawful age discrimination occurred.
The scheme's rules don't require the trustee to discriminate based on age. The original decision to restructure the scheme was made before age discrimination was unlawful. The trustee's current actions are not discriminatory.