England and Wales Case Law

Ian Paul McKavney v Serco Group Plc & Ors

The appellant was not entitled to early payment of his SPLAS pension because his employment was transferred under TUPE, not terminated by redundancy or reorganisation as required by the scheme rules. The rules, properly construed in light of the PPR and the scheme's purpose, did not provide for immediate pension payment on transfer or subsequent redundancy from a non-associated employer. The Ombudsman’s determination was correct in law.

Source excerpt

• Interpretation of pension scheme rules
• Protected persons regulations
• Tupe transfers and pension rights
• Early retirement benefits
• Redundancy and reorganisation in pension context

Read case analysis

McKavney v Serco Group PLC & Ors

McKavney v Serco Group PLC & Ors [2026] EWHC 508 (Ch) (10 March 2026)

The High Court dismissed an appeal from the Pensions Ombudsman, holding that a TUPE transfer did not trigger early SPLAS pension payment on later redundancy.

• Pension rights on redundancy
• Protected persons regulations
• Interpretation of pension scheme rules
• Tupe transfers and pension entitlements
• Pensions
• Tupe

Read case analysis

3i PLC v Decesare & Ors

3i PLC v Decesare & Ors [2025] EWHC 3023 (Ch) (21 November 2025)

The High Court held that the 3i pension scheme fetter protected accrued benefits only, so the plan could lawfully be closed to future benefit accrual.

• Power of amendment
• Interpretation of pension scheme rules
• Fetter on amendment
• Closure of pension plan
• Accrued rights and interests
• Pensions

Read case analysis

Wilson v Port of Felixstowe Pension Trustee Ltd

Wilson v Port of Felixstowe Pension Trustee Ltd [2025] EWHC 1271 (Ch) (27 May 2025)

The High Court struck out a pension claim and granted summary judgment, holding the dispute was barred by a final Pensions Ombudsman determination.

• Res judicata
• Pensions ombudsman determinations
• Interpretation of pension scheme rules
• Summary judgment
• Strike out applications
• Pensions-law

Read case analysis

Renishaw PLC v Ross Trustees Services Ltd & Anor (Re Renishaw Pension Fund)

Renishaw PLC v Ross Trustees Services Ltd & Anor (Re Renishaw Pension Fund) [2025] EWHC 1445 (Ch) (23 May 2025)

The High Court construed Renishaw Pension Fund rule 6A(2) as requiring comparison with the annual pension purchasable from the member’s pension account, not the whole account sum.

• Interpretation of pension scheme rules
• Corrective construction
• Money purchase underpin
• Defined benefit schemes
• Rectification principles
• Pensions

Read case analysis

Railways Pension Trustee Company Limited v ATOS IT Services UK Limited & Anor

Rule 21 of the Atos Section Rules does not create an exhaustive and comprehensive regime for eliminating pension scheme shortfall. The Actuary is required to exercise professional judgment, not merely perform a mechanistic calculation, when determining increases in contributions and reductions in benefits under Rule 21(1)(ii) and (iv). Article 7 of the Protection Order imposes a freestanding, additional balance of cost obligation on the employer to ensure sufficient funding for protected persons, which operates after the contribution increases under Rule 21(1)(ii) but before benefit reduction…

Source excerpt

• Interpretation of pension scheme rules
• Employer contribution obligations
• Protection of pension rights for protected persons
• Statutory overlay on pension schemes

Read case analysis

BBC v BBC Pension Trust Limited & Anor

The word 'interests' in Rule 19.2(3) is a deliberately broad and open-textured term that, in context, includes not only rights earned by past service but also the linkage of those rights to final salary and the ability of Active Members to accrue future service benefits under the scheme as it stands before amendment. Any amendment that affects these interests engages the protection of the proviso, requiring either actuarial certification, provision of substantially equivalent benefits, or approval by Active Members as a class.

Source excerpt

• Interpretation of pension scheme rules
• Power of amendment in pension schemes
• Protection of members' interests
• Statutory restrictions on pension amendments

Read case analysis

Sarah Margaret Ballard v Jonathan Buzzard

The court found that the evidence overwhelmingly demonstrated a common intention by the Trustees and the College that Mr Beauchamp's signature was to be effective both as a Trustee and on behalf of the College. The court ordered rectification of the signature blocks on the SAAs and the 2006 Trust Deed to reflect this intention, thereby validating the amendments.

Source excerpt

• Rectification of trust deeds
• Execution of pension scheme amendments
• Capacity of signatories
• Interpretation of pension scheme rules

Read case analysis

Railways Pension Trustee Company Ltd v Atos IT Services UK Ltd & Anor

Railways Pension Trustee Company Ltd v Atos IT Services UK Ltd & Anor [2024] EWCA Civ 98 (09 February 2024)

The Court of Appeal upheld an interpretation of the Atos section pension rules and Protection Order, dismissing Atos’s appeal on deficit repair and funding.

• Interpretation of pension scheme rules
• Employer contribution obligations
• Protected persons under railways act
• Interaction of scheme rules and statutory protection
• Deficit repair in occupational pension schemes
• Pensions-law

Read case analysis

Railways Pension Trustee Company Limited v Atos IT Services UK Limited & Anor.

The High Court interpreted pension scheme Rule 21 and the Protection Order for the Railways Pension Scheme, holding the actuary has a discretion and Article 7 imposes a funding obligation on the employer.

• Interpretation of pension scheme rules
• Employer contribution obligations
• Protection of pension rights
• Application of statutory orders to pension schemes
• Pensions-law
• Trust-law

Read case analysis