Arjo Wiggins Ltd v Ralph

Arjo Wiggins Ltd v Ralph

The Pensions Ombudsman has jurisdiction to investigate and determine complaints even where the comparable cause of action would have been statute barred in court, but must give effect to a valid limitation defence and cannot award substantive relief in such cases. The Ombudsman must determine disputes in accordance with the law, including limitation defences, to avoid inconsistent outcomes between court and Ombudsman decisions.

Parties
Appellant: Arjo Wiggins Limited; Respondent: Henry Thomas Ralph; Intervener: Pensions Ombudsman
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
07 December 2009
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment
Outcome
appeal allowed in part
Legal Topics
Maladministration, Limitation Periods, Jurisdiction of Pensions Ombudsman, Remedies, Statutory Interpretation
Pensions Law Administrative Law Maladministration Limitation Periods Jurisdiction of Pensions Ombudsman Remedies Statutory Interpretation

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 15 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Arjo Wiggins Limited

Appellant

Henry Thomas Ralph

Respondent

Pensions Ombudsman

Intervener

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Pensions Ombudsman can investigate and determine complaints that would be statute barred in court proceedings
  2. 2 Whether the Pensions Ombudsman can award substantive relief where a limitation defence would defeat a court action
  3. 3 Whether the Pensions Ombudsman must apply limitation defences as part of the law

Ratio Decidendi

The Pensions Ombudsman has jurisdiction to investigate and determine complaints even where the comparable cause of action would have been statute barred in court, but must give effect to a valid limitation defence and cannot award substantive relief in such cases. The Ombudsman must determine disputes in accordance with the law, including limitation defences, to avoid inconsistent outcomes between court and Ombudsman decisions.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed in part

Orders

  • The Pensions Ombudsman had no power to award substantive relief to a complainant whose complaint would have been defeated by a limitation defence had it been brought by action in court.
  • Submissions invited on the form of order to give effect to this conclusion.