WRPA 1999 meaning

Re Michael Bernard McNamara; Wilson and another (joint trustees in bankruptcy of Michael Bernard McNamara) v McNamara and others [2022] EWHC 243 (Ch) What are the practical implications of this case? The applicants were prevented from advancing a fresh point after a Court of Justice ruling. Their argument—that the Court of Justice’s conclusion that WRPA 1999, s 11 was contrary to Article 49 TFEU, save where justified in the public interest, meant the UK High Court had to assess justification—was rejected. The Court of Justice is not an appellate body issuing instructions to a lower court; apart from delivering definitive statements of law, it lacks authority to direct the national court’s procedure or determinations. It followed that any justification case had to be raised within the existing proceedings, and the applicants had not done so before the preliminary ruling was obtained. Although a court may, prior to judgment being sealed, re-open a matter to entertain an additional question, such applications are exceptional, discouraged, and on the facts here...

Original news Mr S (CAS-30342–Z1B0) – 2 July 2024 Summary The PO has dismissed a complaint concerning a PSO. The PSO was correctly determined at the valuation date as a fixed percentage of the complainant’s cash equivalent transfer value. As the scheme’s unit prices fell after the valuation date, the administrators were right to cash in additional units to ensure the same monetary amount, as calculated at that date, was transferred to the ex-spouse’s pension arrangement. The PO’s decision highlights the challenges that can arise even when there is only a short delay in implementing a pension sharing order. What were the facts? Mr S was a member of the Fidelity Master Trust–Sytner Group Retirement Plan Section (the Scheme). A Pension Sharing Order (PSO) was issued against Mr S’s Scheme benefits. Section 29(2) Welfare Reform and Pensions Act 1999 (WRPA 1999) provided that: “Where the relevant order specifies a percentage value to be transferred, the appropriate amount …. is the specified percentage of the cash equivalent...

ARCHIVED : This Practice Note has been archived and is not maintained. From 8 October 2001, the Welfare Reform and Pensions Act 1999 (WRPA 1999) placed a duty on employers with five or more staff to nominate and enable access to a stakeholder pension arrangement for their workforce as required by applicable law. That designation and access duty, as provided for in WRPA 1999, s 3, was superseded on 1 October 2012, when automatic enrolment into a qualifying scheme, introduced by the Pensions Act 2008, came into legal force. Nonetheless, save where a relevant exception applies, employers remain obliged, for relevant employees, to deduct member contributions to a stakeholder scheme from remuneration and remit them promptly to the trustees or managers. In addition, any existing or newly established stakeholder pension schemes must still be administered in accordance with the statutory rules for such schemes, for example as regards registration and cost. This Practice Note offers an overview of the legislative framework and the operation of stakeholder pension schemes before...

From 1 October 2012, the duty on employers to nominate and facilitate access to a stakeholder pension scheme (as set out in section 3 of the Welfare Reform and Pensions Act 1999 (WRPA 1999)) ceased, as the new requirement by employers to enrol workers automatically into an automatic enrolment scheme (introduced by the Pensions Act 2008) took effect thereafter. However, unless a relevant exception applies (eg where an employer is notified that a designated stakeholder pension scheme has begun winding up), employers remain under an ongoing obligation, as applicable, in respect of relevant employees, to deduct employee contributions to any existing stakeholder scheme from pay, as appropriate, and forward them to the trustees or managers of the schemes. In addition, both existing and newly created stakeholder pension schemes must continue to be run in line with the statutory requirements applicable to such schemes, as necessary. Ongoing familiarity with the legal requirements governing the establishment, maintenance and eventual winding-up of stakeholder pension schemes is therefore essential, and the purpose of this...

Practice Note: Pension sharing orders on divorce in Scotland (defined benefit schemes) This Practice Note offers a concise overview of how pension sharing orders on divorce in Scotland apply to defined benefit pension schemes. It is not designed to address every detail of the pension sharing framework. Key legislation and regulations Family Law (Scotland) Act 1985 (FL(S)A 1985) Part IV of the Welfare Reform and Pensions Act 1999 (WRPA 1999) Pensions on Divorce etc (Pension Sharing) (Scotland) Regulations 2000, SI 2000/1051 There are also other pertinent regulations, some of which are mentioned within this Practice Note. Following the divorce of a marriage or the dissolution of a civil partnership, a pension may constitute part of the matrimonial property. The court may order a redistribution of the pension between the spouses or civil partners, or the parties may reach an agreement between themselves on how the pension should be divided...

A pension sharing order A pension sharing order enables one party to obtain, in their own name and in their own right, benefits directly debited from the other party’s pension scheme, and secures a clean break between the parties regarding pensions. Sections 11 and 12 of the Welfare Reform and Pensions Act 1999 (WRPA 1999) state that pension rights under approved pension schemes do not vest in a trustee in bankruptcy, provided the bankruptcy petition was presented on or after 29 May 2000 under the legislation. Consequently, if the individual holding the pension to be shared is made bankrupt, the court’s authority to make a pension sharing order should remain unaffected in law...