Merchant Navy Officers Pension Fund Trustees Ltd (MNOPF) v Watkins [2013] EWHC 4741 (Ch) (11 December 2013)

Merchant Navy Officers Pension Fund Trustees Ltd (MNOPF) v Watkins [2013] EWHC 4741 (Ch) (11 December 2013)

There is compelling evidence that the 1999 amendment to Rule 10.1 was a drafting mistake and did not reflect the trustee board's intention. Rectification is granted to correct the rule so that guaranteed revaluation does not apply to old section benefits.

Citation
[2013] EWHC 4741 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant/respondent: MNOPF Trustees Limited; Defendant/appellant: Bryan Watkins
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 December 2013
Procedural Posture
Rectification Claim (chancery Division) / Trial Judgment
Outcome
Rectification granted
Legal Topics
Rectification of Trust Deed, Pension Scheme Rules, Mistake in Legal Documents
Equity Trusts Pensions Rectification of Trust Deed Pension Scheme Rules Mistake in Legal Documents

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 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

MNOPF Trustees Limited

Claimant/respondent

Bryan Watkins

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Rectification Claim (chancery Division) / Trial Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the 1999 amendment to Rule 10.1 of the MNOPF Trust Deed and Rules was a mistake not reflecting the true intention of the trustee board
  2. 2 Whether rectification of the deed should be granted to correct the mistake

Ratio Decidendi

There is compelling evidence that the 1999 amendment to Rule 10.1 was a drafting mistake and did not reflect the trustee board's intention. Rectification is granted to correct the rule so that guaranteed revaluation does not apply to old section benefits.

Court Disposition

Rectification granted

Orders

  • The MNOPF Trust Deed and Rules are rectified so that in Rule 10.1, each reference to 'Deferred Pension under Rule 10.1.1' is replaced with 'Deferred Pension in respect of Service (but for the avoidance of doubt not for Pre 78 Service) under Rule 10.1.1'.
  • The defendant is appointed to represent all members whose interests would be adversely affected if the rectification claim were to succeed.