Baugniet v Capita Employee Benefits Ltd (t/a Teachers' Pensions) & Anor

Baugniet v Capita Employee Benefits Ltd (t/a Teachers' Pensions) & Anor

The Pensions Ombudsman erred in law by failing to properly analyse and determine whether, but for the administrator's maladministration/negligence, the appellant would have secured a higher service credit and suffered financial loss; the matter is remitted for reconsideration of the causation and remedy for financial loss, and for reconsideration of the appropriate compensation for distress and inconvenience, taking into account all instances of maladministration.

Parties
Appellant: Dr William Baugniet; First Respondent: Capita Employee Benefits Limited (T/A Teachers’ Pensions); Second Respondent: The Department for Education
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
20 March 2017
Procedural Posture
Appeal From Pensions Ombudsman / Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part; matter remitted to Pensions Ombudsman for reconsideration.
Legal Topics
Maladministration, Negligence, Informed Consent, Legitimate Expectation, Compensation for Distress, Financial Loss, Statutory Interpretation
Pensions Law Administrative Law Contract Law Tort Law Maladministration Negligence Informed Consent Legitimate Expectation +3 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 5 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 9
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dr William Baugniet

Appellant

Capita Employee Benefits Limited (T/A Teachers’ Pensions)

First Respondent

The Department for Education

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal From Pensions Ombudsman / Judgment on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Pensions Ombudsman erred in law by failing to address the causation and remedy for financial loss resulting from maladministration/negligence by the scheme administrator
  2. 2 Whether the appellant had a right to informed consent or a legitimate expectation regarding the service credit
  3. 3 Whether the compensation awarded for distress and inconvenience was adequate

Ratio Decidendi

The Pensions Ombudsman erred in law by failing to properly analyse and determine whether, but for the administrator's maladministration/negligence, the appellant would have secured a higher service credit and suffered financial loss; the matter is remitted for reconsideration of the causation and remedy for financial loss, and for reconsideration of the appropriate compensation for distress and inconvenience, taking into account all instances of maladministration.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part; matter remitted to Pensions Ombudsman for reconsideration.

Orders

  • Remit to the Pensions Ombudsman for reconsideration of the complaint as one of negligence causing financial loss and the appropriate remedy.
  • Reconsider the extent of maladministration and the appropriate compensation for distress and inconvenience, including subsequent errors up to 2.6.16.