Carr v Thales Pension Trustees Ltd & Anor

Carr v Thales Pension Trustees Ltd & Anor

Rule 1.11 of the 2000 Rules is to be construed as giving primacy to the reference to RPI capped at 5%, not to the Revaluation Orders, and the 2.5% cap does not apply to pension increases under this rule.

Parties
Complainant: Robert Allan Carr; Respondent to Appeal and Complaint: Thales Pension Trustees Ltd; Respondent to Complaint and Appellant: Thales UK Ltd
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
22 April 2020
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Interpretation of Pension Scheme Rules, Statutory Construction, Indexation of Pensions, Revaluation Orders, Retail Prices Index Vs Consumer Price Index
Pensions Trusts Contract Law Interpretation of Pension Scheme Rules Statutory Construction Indexation of Pensions Revaluation Orders Retail Prices Index Vs Consumer Price Index

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 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Robert Allan Carr

Complainant

Thales Pension Trustees Ltd

Respondent to Appeal and Complaint

Thales UK Ltd

Respondent to Complaint and Appellant

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Rule 1.11 of the 2000 Rules gives primacy to increases based on RPI or CPI
  2. 2 Whether the 2.5% cap applies to pension increases under Rule 1.11
  3. 3 Proper construction of inconsistent provisions in pension scheme rules

Ratio Decidendi

Rule 1.11 of the 2000 Rules is to be construed as giving primacy to the reference to RPI capped at 5%, not to the Revaluation Orders, and the 2.5% cap does not apply to pension increases under this rule.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The Ombudsman’s determination is upheld.
  • No order as to costs.