Trustee Solutions Ltd & Ors v Dubery & Anor [2006] EWHC 1426 (Ch) (21 June 2006)

Trustee Solutions Ltd & Ors v Dubery & Anor [2006] EWHC 1426 (Ch) (21 June 2006)

The rules of the Scheme were not validly amended because the documents relied on were unsigned and did not comply with the requirement for 'writing under hand' by the trustees and the company. There was insufficient evidence to establish an estoppel by convention binding the general body of members. Therefore, the Barber window remains open. Male members with accrued Barber window service who had attained age 60 before winding up are entitled to priority under section 73(3)(b) of the Pensions Act 1995.

Citation
[2006] EWHC 1426 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: Trustee Solutions Limited; Claimant: Stephen Patrick Comar; Claimant: Keith James Edwards; Defendant: Leslie Dubery; Defendant: Julia Cripps
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
21 June 2006
Procedural Posture
Chancery Division Pension Scheme Dispute / Judgment After Trial
Outcome
Claim allowed in part; declaration that the rules were not validly amended and the Barber window remains open.
Legal Topics
Pension Scheme Amendment, Equal Treatment of Men and Women, Estoppel by Convention, Trust Deed Construction, Priority of Payments on Winding Up
Pensions Law Trusts Law Employment Law European Law Pension Scheme Amendment Equal Treatment of Men and Women Estoppel by Convention Trust Deed Construction +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 3 Authorities cited 18 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Trustee Solutions Limited

Claimant

Stephen Patrick Comar

Claimant

Keith James Edwards

Claimant

Leslie Dubery

Defendant

Julia Cripps

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Chancery Division Pension Scheme Dispute / Judgment After Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the rules of the pension scheme were validly amended to equalise retirement ages
  2. 2 Whether estoppel by convention closed the Barber window
  3. 3 How priorities are determined under section 73 of the Pensions Act 1995

Ratio Decidendi

The rules of the Scheme were not validly amended because the documents relied on were unsigned and did not comply with the requirement for 'writing under hand' by the trustees and the company. There was insufficient evidence to establish an estoppel by convention binding the general body of members. Therefore, the Barber window remains open. Male members with accrued Barber window service who had attained age 60 before winding up are entitled to priority under section 73(3)(b) of the Pensions Act 1995.

Court Disposition

Claim allowed in part; declaration that the rules were not validly amended and the Barber window remains open.

Orders

  • Declaration that the rules of the Scheme were not validly amended to equalise retirement ages.
  • Declaration that the Barber window remains open.