Davidson v Arla Foods UK Plc & Anor [2006] EWHC 1234 (Ch) (26 May 2006)

Davidson v Arla Foods UK Plc & Anor [2006] EWHC 1234 (Ch) (26 May 2006)

The Compromise Agreement, specifically clause 7.3, fixed the Claimant's pension entitlement as at the Normal Pension Date based on an agreed salary and augmentation, and by necessary implication, the Claimant gave up any right to further revaluation under the Scheme. The Claimant is not entitled to both the agreed augmentation and statutory revaluation; the agreement substituted certainty for both parties.

Citation
[2006] EWHC 1234 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: Richard Colin Neil Davidson; First Defendant: Arla Foods UK PLC; Second Defendant: The Trustees of The Express Pension Scheme
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
26 May 2006
Procedural Posture
Civil / Summary Judgment Application Under CPR 24
Outcome
Claimant's application for summary judgment dismissed.
Legal Topics
Compromise Agreement, Pension Entitlements, Specific Performance, Damages, Interpretation of Contractual Terms
Employment Law Pensions Law Contract Law Compromise Agreement Pension Entitlements Specific Performance Damages Interpretation of Contractual Terms

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Richard Colin Neil Davidson

Claimant

Arla Foods UK PLC

First Defendant

The Trustees of The Express Pension Scheme

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Summary Judgment Application Under CPR 24

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Claimant is entitled to revaluation of his pension entitlement under the Compromise Agreement in addition to the augmentation provided by clause 7.3.
  2. 2 Whether the Claimant gave up his rights to revaluation under the Scheme by accepting the terms of the Compromise Agreement.
  3. 3 Whether the First Defendant was in breach of its obligation to procure augmentation of pension rights by the Termination Date.

Ratio Decidendi

The Compromise Agreement, specifically clause 7.3, fixed the Claimant's pension entitlement as at the Normal Pension Date based on an agreed salary and augmentation, and by necessary implication, the Claimant gave up any right to further revaluation under the Scheme. The Claimant is not entitled to both the agreed augmentation and statutory revaluation; the agreement substituted certainty for both parties.

Court Disposition

Claimant's application for summary judgment dismissed.

Orders

  • Claimant's application under CPR Part 24 dismissed.
  • Court to hear submissions as to the form of order and costs at hand-down.