Grievson v Grievson & Ors [2011] EWHC 1367 (Ch) (09 June 2011)

Grievson v Grievson & Ors [2011] EWHC 1367 (Ch) (09 June 2011)

The Pensions Ombudsman was entitled to find that Allen Grievson had been offered more than his strict entitlement under the scheme rules, and the allocation of assets was notional. However, the question of estoppel was not addressed and must be remitted for determination on the facts.

Citation
[2011] EWHC 1367 (Ch)
Parties
Appellant: Allen Grievson; First Respondent: Norman William Grievson; Second Respondent: Calberto Limited; Third Respondent: Brewin Dolphin Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
09 June 2011
Procedural Posture
Appeal From Pensions Ombudsman Decision / Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part; question of estoppel remitted to Pensions Ombudsman for determination.
Legal Topics
Transfer Value Calculation, Estoppel, Pension Scheme Rules, Money Purchase Schemes
Pensions Trusts Employment Transfer Value Calculation Estoppel Pension Scheme Rules Money Purchase Schemes

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 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Allen Grievson

Appellant

Norman William Grievson

First Respondent

Calberto Limited

Second Respondent

Brewin Dolphin Limited

Third Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal From Pensions Ombudsman Decision / Judgment on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the transfer value offered to Allen Grievson was calculated in accordance with the pension scheme rules and previous actuarial valuations
  2. 2 Whether Allen Grievson is entitled to a transfer value based on a 'share of fund basis' or subject to Inland Revenue limits
  3. 3 Whether estoppel by representation or convention applies to the calculation of Allen Grievson's transfer value

Ratio Decidendi

The Pensions Ombudsman was entitled to find that Allen Grievson had been offered more than his strict entitlement under the scheme rules, and the allocation of assets was notional. However, the question of estoppel was not addressed and must be remitted for determination on the facts.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part; question of estoppel remitted to Pensions Ombudsman for determination.

Orders

  • The appeal is allowed.
  • The question of estoppel is remitted to the Pensions Ombudsman for determination on the facts in accordance with the legal principles summarised.