Brambles Administration Limited & Ors v Christine Mary Harvey & Ors

Brambles Administration Limited & Ors v Christine Mary Harvey & Ors

The appeal was dismissed because the Ombudsman’s findings on jurisdiction, trust structure, dishonesty, and remedies were supported by the evidence and law; the appellants failed to show any error of law or misapplication of legal principles.

Parties
Appellant: Brambles Administration Limited; Appellant: Simon Hamilton Kaigh; Appellant: Michael McNally; Appellant: SHK Property Services Limited; Appellant: Gilbert Trading Limited; Respondent: Ms Christine Mary Harvey; Respondent: Mr Mark Atkins; Respondent: Mr Brian Gilbert Hale; Respondent: Mr Neil Martin Lafferty; Respondent: Mr Peter Bruce Long
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
14 November 2025
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Pension Scheme Administration, Trustee Duties, Dishonesty, Limitation Periods, Exoneration Clauses, Remedies for Breach of Trust
Pensions Law Trusts Law Equity Pension Scheme Administration Trustee Duties Dishonesty Limitation Periods Exoneration Clauses +1 more

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

Parties

Brambles Administration Limited

Appellant

Simon Hamilton Kaigh

Appellant

Michael McNally

Appellant

SHK Property Services Limited

Appellant

Gilbert Trading Limited

Appellant

Ms Christine Mary Harvey

Respondent

Mr Mark Atkins

Respondent

Mr Brian Gilbert Hale

Respondent

Mr Neil Martin Lafferty

Respondent

Mr Peter Bruce Long

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Pensions Ombudsman had jurisdiction to determine complaints brought out of time under Regulation 5 of the Personal and Occupational Pension Schemes (Pension Ombudsman) Regulations 1996
  2. 2 Whether the pension schemes were constituted as single trusts or as sub-trusts for each member
  3. 3 Whether the Ombudsman erred in law in making findings of dishonesty against the appellants

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was dismissed because the Ombudsman’s findings on jurisdiction, trust structure, dishonesty, and remedies were supported by the evidence and law; the appellants failed to show any error of law or misapplication of legal principles.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • All grounds of appeal dismissed
  • Ombudsman’s Determination and remedies upheld