Hopkin v Financial Security Assurance (UK) Ltd

Hopkin v Financial Security Assurance (UK) Ltd

The contract, when properly construed in light of the scheme documents and the EPP, did not confer an unconditional right to vesting of performance shares upon the appellant. The terms 'award', 'vest', and 'paid' were used intentionally and consistently with the EPP, which provided for vesting only at the end of performance cycles and subject to further conditions. The appellant was not entitled to the declaration sought.

Parties
Appellant/claimant: Richard Howard Hopkin; Respondent/defendant: Financial Security Assurance (UK) Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
14 March 2011
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court Judgment
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Construction of Employment Contracts, Vesting of Performance Shares, Interpretation of Bonus and Share Award Clauses
Employment Law Contract Law Construction of Employment Contracts Vesting of Performance Shares Interpretation of Bonus and Share Award Clauses

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 3 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Richard Howard Hopkin

Appellant/claimant

Financial Security Assurance (UK) Limited

Respondent/defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellant was entitled to unconditional vesting of performance shares under his employment contract upon redundancy
  2. 2 Proper construction of the employment contract and related scheme documents regarding vesting and payment of performance shares

Ratio Decidendi

The contract, when properly construed in light of the scheme documents and the EPP, did not confer an unconditional right to vesting of performance shares upon the appellant. The terms 'award', 'vest', and 'paid' were used intentionally and consistently with the EPP, which provided for vesting only at the end of performance cycles and subject to further conditions. The appellant was not entitled to the declaration sought.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed; no declaration granted to appellant