City Of Edinburgh Council v Scottish Council For Research & The University Court of The University of Glasgow [2013] ScotCS CSIH_15 (08 March 2013)

City Of Edinburgh Council v Scottish Council For Research & The University Court of The University of Glasgow [2013] ScotCS CSIH_15 (08 March 2013)

There is no obvious drafting error in regulation 77(2); the restriction to 'transferred bodies' is not irrational or unworkable, and any perceived injustice is a matter for Parliament. The reclaiming motion fails as the statutory language must be given its literal meaning.

Citation
[2013] ScotCS CSIH_15
Parties
Pursuer and Reclaimer: The City of Edinburgh Council; First Defender and Respondent: Scottish Council for Research in Education; Second Defender and Respondent: The University Court of The University of Glasgow
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
08 March 2013
Procedural Posture
Reclaiming Motion (appeal) / Decision on Appeal
Outcome
reclaiming motion refused
Legal Topics
Local Government Pension Scheme, Admission Agreements, Actuarial Valuation, Statutory Rectification
Pensions Administrative Law Statutory Interpretation Local Government Pension Scheme Admission Agreements Actuarial Valuation Statutory Rectification

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 2 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The City of Edinburgh Council

Pursuer and Reclaimer

Scottish Council for Research in Education

First Defender and Respondent

The University Court of The University of Glasgow

Second Defender and Respondent

Procedural Posture

Reclaiming Motion (appeal) / Decision on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether regulation 77(2) of the Local Government Pension Scheme (Scotland) Regulations 1998 contains a drafting error by referring to 'transferred body' instead of 'admission body'
  2. 2 Whether the administering authority can obtain a revision of rates and adjustments certificate years after cessation of the admission agreement

Ratio Decidendi

There is no obvious drafting error in regulation 77(2); the restriction to 'transferred bodies' is not irrational or unworkable, and any perceived injustice is a matter for Parliament. The reclaiming motion fails as the statutory language must be given its literal meaning.

Court Disposition

reclaiming motion refused