Seton House Group Ltd & Anor v Mercer Ltd [2014] EWHC 4234 (Ch) (12 December 2014)

Seton House Group Ltd & Anor v Mercer Ltd [2014] EWHC 4234 (Ch) (12 December 2014)

The claimants were fixed with constructive knowledge of the relevant facts by virtue of having received the due diligence report containing the actuary's warning, which should reasonably have been read by a senior employee and would have prompted further enquiry revealing the equalisation issue. Reliance on Mercer or Eversheds did not amount to taking all reasonable steps to obtain expert advice, and the claim was therefore time-barred under s14A Limitation Act 1980. The Master applied the correct legal test and summary judgment was appropriate.

Citation
[2014] EWHC 4234 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant/appellant: Seton House Group Ltd; Claimant/appellant: Britax Pensions Trust Ltd; Defendant/respondent: Mercer Ltd
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
12 December 2014
Procedural Posture
Appeal (from Summary Judgment) / Appeal Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Constructive Knowledge Under Limitation Act 1980 S14 a, Summary Judgment Principles, Professional Duties of Advisers, Pension Scheme Equalisation
Limitation of Actions Professional Negligence Pensions Law Constructive Knowledge Under Limitation Act 1980 S14 a Summary Judgment Principles Professional Duties of Advisers Pension Scheme Equalisation

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 4 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Seton House Group Ltd

Claimant/appellant

Britax Pensions Trust Ltd

Claimant/appellant

Mercer Ltd

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal (from Summary Judgment) / Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether claimants had constructive knowledge under s14A Limitation Act 1980 prior to the deemed issue date, barring the claim as time-barred
  2. 2 Whether the Master applied the correct legal test for constructive knowledge and summary judgment
  3. 3 Whether reliance on professional advisers (Mercer, Eversheds) constituted taking all reasonable steps for s14A(10) purposes

Ratio Decidendi

The claimants were fixed with constructive knowledge of the relevant facts by virtue of having received the due diligence report containing the actuary's warning, which should reasonably have been read by a senior employee and would have prompted further enquiry revealing the equalisation issue. Reliance on Mercer or Eversheds did not amount to taking all reasonable steps to obtain expert advice, and the claim was therefore time-barred under s14A Limitation Act 1980. The Master applied the correct legal test and summary judgment was appropriate.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Summary judgment for the defendant stands
  • Claim dismissed as statute-barred