Betafence Ltd v Veys & Ors

Betafence Ltd v Veys & Ors

The 1991 Amendment did not require employer consent for retirement between ages 60 and 65 without deduction; the 1993 Amendment is valid except to the extent it fails to recognise accrued rights under the 1991 Amendment, and lack of notification does not invalidate the amendment.

Parties
Claimant: Betafence Limited; Defendant: Edward Jerome Veys; Defendant: John Keith Carnell; Defendant: Kevin Mansell; Defendant: Derek Richard Hawkes; Defendant: Christopher William Robinson; Defendant: Roeland Van Den Dungen; Defendant: John Ferris; Defendant: Neil Holmes; Defendant: Gary Alfred Crookes
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
08 May 2006
Procedural Posture
Civil / Judgment
Outcome
Claimant's case rejected on primary issue; 1991 Amendment did not require employer consent for early retirement between ages 60 and 65 without deduction; 1993 Amendment valid except as regards accrued rights prior to 17 November 1993.
Legal Topics
Scheme Amendments, Equal Treatment, Retrospective Effect, Trustee Discretion, Notification Requirements
Pensions Trusts Employment Scheme Amendments Equal Treatment Retrospective Effect Trustee Discretion Notification Requirements

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 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Betafence Limited

Claimant

Edward Jerome Veys

Defendant

John Keith Carnell

Defendant

Kevin Mansell

Defendant

Derek Richard Hawkes

Defendant

Christopher William Robinson

Defendant

Roeland Van Den Dungen

Defendant

John Ferris

Defendant

Neil Holmes

Defendant

Gary Alfred Crookes

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the 1991 Amendment required employer consent for early retirement between ages 60 and 65 without pension deduction
  2. 2 Validity of the 1993 Amendment given lack of notification and mistake
  3. 3 Application of equal treatment under EU law to pension scheme amendments

Ratio Decidendi

The 1991 Amendment did not require employer consent for retirement between ages 60 and 65 without deduction; the 1993 Amendment is valid except to the extent it fails to recognise accrued rights under the 1991 Amendment, and lack of notification does not invalidate the amendment.

Court Disposition

Claimant's case rejected on primary issue; 1991 Amendment did not require employer consent for early retirement between ages 60 and 65 without deduction; 1993 Amendment valid except as regards accrued rights prior to 17 November 1993.

Orders

  • Declaration that 1991 Amendment allowed retirement between ages 60 and 65 without deduction and without employer consent
  • Declaration that 1993 Amendment valid only as regards benefits accruing after 17 November 1993