Featured documents
R (Greyhound Board of Great Britain Ltd) v Welsh Ministers [2026] EWHC 670 (Admin) What are the practical implications of this case? The ruling reinforces the constitutional divide between the courts and the legislature. It explains that the scheme and framework of the Government of Wales Act 2006 (GWA 2006) embody that separation of powers, and that any judicial attempt to recognise and enforce a common law obligation on Welsh Ministers to consult prior to introducing legislation in the Senedd would trespass upon that boundary. This is not a departure from established principle; case law has already upheld comparable rules for lawmakers in Scotland and at Westminster. However, this is the first express confirmation of the position for Welsh lawmakers, and the first time this dimension of the GWA 2006 has been analysed in such depth. The court examined earlier
The solution arrived through the United Nations Compensation Commission (UNCC), a quasi‑judicial body handling mass claims, created under UN Security Council Resolution 687. By addressing environmental harm—most notably via its ‘F4’ claim class—the UNCC set a seminal benchmark shaping how international law and contemporary arbitral panels allocate financial responsibility for wartime ecological devastation. With present-day wars in areas such as Eastern Europe and the Middle East bringing dam breaches, strikes on chemical facilities, and the burning of farmland, the UNCC’s legacy endures as an essential reference point for states, global investors, and companies engaged in post‑conflict arbitration. The F4 claims: Quantifying the unquantifiable Prior to the 1990s, mechanisms in international law for war reparations overwhelmingly favoured property loss, foregone earnings, and bodily injury. The natural world was commonly treated as a mute, non-compensable victim of armed hostilities...
Understanding the farming business as a business Many farms still use long-standing structures that arose by habit, not strategy. Sole traders, informal partnerships and outdated partnership deeds are common. While once effective, such setups can cause major issues around succession, tax planning and involving the next generation. A corporate team can take a fresh, business-led view of the farm, asking: Who owns the land and other critical assets? Who manages daily operations? Who carries the risk and who enjoys the return? What is the enduring plan for succession? From this review, the team can confirm whether the current setup is fit for purpose or if an alternative — for example an updated partnership agreement, a company, a limited liability partnership, or a blended model — would better meet the family’s aims. Tax efficiency through joined-up advice Tax sits at the centre of most
Most recent News
According to XPS Pensions Group ( XPS), the combined surpluses across around 5,000 UK retirement savings schemes in total fell from £126bn to £98bn between 30 November 2023 and 30 December 2023. A scheme is in surplus when the value of its assets exceeds its liabilities. In that situation, it may approach the insurance market for a buy-out deal to strengthen security for members’ benefits. Pension plans hold substantial investments in government bonds, referred to as gilts......
Britain’s Pension Protection Fund ( PPF) has issued its January 2024 bulletin on the PPF 7800 index, outlining the projected funding status for the 5,050 defined......
Summary The DPO upheld a complaint, concluding that a pension scheme trustee committed multiple breaches of trust by directing scheme assets into speculative ventures and holdings in which he had a personal stake. He did not obtain advice before making these investment decisions. Given the trustee’s reckless conduct, the scheme’s exoneration and indemnity provisions afforded no protection. The Ombudsman’s decision emphasises that trustees can be personally liable for breaches of investment duties. What were the facts? Mr M and Mr Y were members of the Focus Administration Pension Scheme (the Scheme). Mr Williams acted as trustee, initially in his personal capacity and later indirectly through Focus Administration Ltd ( Focus), which he controlled as a director/shareholder. Brambles Administration Ltd ( Brambles) served as the Scheme administrator. The Scheme’s assets were allocated between: lending at below‑market rates to unregulated finance companies and small property...
What was the background to the PPF's consultation on the 2024–25 levy rules? Created under the Pensions Act 2004, the Pension Protection Fund ( PPF) provides compensation to members of qualifying defined benefit ( DB) occupational pension schemes, including the DB section of hybrid arrangements, when certain criteria are satisfied: the sponsoring employer experiences a qualifying insolvency on or after 6 April 2005 the scheme’s assets are inadequate to secure benefits at PPF compensation levels Except where an exemption applies, every UK DB occupational scheme is required to pay an annual levy to the PPF. This levy comprises a scheme-based component and a risk-based component. The scheme-based part mirrors the membership headcount and the size of the scheme’s liabilities. The risk-based part reflects the extent of any funding shortfall and the likelihood of the scheme entering the PPF during the levy year....
On 4 January 2024 at Burnley Crown Court, Judge Ian Stephen Unsworth handed down to Stephen Smith, 64, a ten‑month custodial sentence, suspended for twelve months, following a case initiated by the Pensions Regulator. The ex‑pension trustee had confessed to directing scheme monies into loans for entities linked to the pension plan’s employer, a business operating in both construction and engineering. Smith, of Cumbria, previously served as a trustee of the scheme associated with Marcus Worthington and Co Ltd, a contractor that went into administration in September 2019 and was dissolved in January 2022. He must also complete 150 hours of unpaid work and contribute £1,000 towards prosecution costs......
On 3 January 2024, Fitch Ratings delivered an upbeat outlook for the sector, forecasting another year of record‑setting UK deal volumes over the year ahead. The definitive calculation of the aggregate value of 2023 pension buy‑in and buyout transactions remains unpublished; however, the broad consensus among specialists is that it will top the prior high of £43.8bn achieved in 2019. The agency further indicated that this trajectory is expected to endure throughout 2024......
Hymans Robertson urged the government to explore creating a cross-party body to forge a durable consensus on key choices shaping the retirement savings arena. With widespread chatter that voters could head to the ballot box this year and remove the Conservative Party in favour of a Labour administration, the firm pressed its case. Calum Cooper, a partner at Hymans Robertson, said they want government to commit to a longer-term pact with pensions policy. He added that such commitment is essential to provide corporates with assurance about a predictable future......
Original news Mr T, BP Pension Fund ( CAS-52248- V9M5)—5 October 2023. Summary The Pensions Ombudsman dismissed a complaint that a member missed the opportunity to transfer on a more favourable basis after the basis changed with the new calendar year. An administrative mistake within the member’s records did not impact how the transfer value was calculated, nor did it prevent the complainant from transferring. The scheme could not have known of the member’s wish to transfer until it was too late, and it had no duty to alert members to any potential changes to the transfer basis. The decision highlights to schemes the need to maintain accurate member records. What were the facts? Mr T was a member of the BP Pension Fund (the Scheme). On 21 December 2017 Mr T was contemplating......
Original news Mrs S, Royal Mail Defined Contribution Plan ( CAS-45582- S0J0) - 12 October 2023. Summary The Pensions Ombudsman dismissed a complaint alleging the Scheme had misapplied its discretion by directing part of a lump-sum death benefit to the deceased member’s girlfriend instead of relatives. The trustee had adopted an appropriate process and correctly applied the governing rules. The outcome could not be considered irrational. This decision serves as a reminder that challenging the exercise of a trustee’s discretionary judgement is rarely straightforward in the majority of cases. What were the facts? Mr S held scheme membership in the Royal Mail Defined Contribution Plan (the Scheme) ......
Lane Clark & Peacock LLP ( LCP) Lane Clark & Peacock LLP ( LCP) chose not to name the insurers ahead of their announcements, a timing that may align with an upturn in the market for shifting pension liabilities to insurers this year. LCP reported an estimated £50bn of pension buy-in and buy-out activity in 2023, well above the prior high of £43.8bn achieved in 2019, in this market during the year. With new insurers starting to write business this year, aggregate deal value might reach £65bn in 2024, the consultancy said......
What was the background to the DWP's review? Five years on from the legislation establishing the then-new defined contribution ( DC) master trust authorisation framework, the DWP and TPR issued an in-depth joint assessment of the master trust landscape. It explores market segments, fee structures, charges, consolidation, growing scale, and how these interact with the Chancellor’s Mansion House compact alongside wider DWP policies and proposals. The report outlines how TPR is adapting to a shifting market and highlights where the authorisation and supervisory model for master trusts might require refinement, with a particular emphasis on investment governance and closer engagement with schemes as they expand. By way of reminder, master trusts emerged after auto-enrolment’s introduction in 2012 and are, in essence, multi-employer money purchase occupational pension arrangements for employers with no corporate link. As master trusts expanded and worries about the operation of some...
Revenue and Customs Commissioners v E. On UK plc [2023] EWCA Civ 1383, [2023] All ER ( D) 34 ( Dec) What are the practical implications of this case? The judgment offers a clear review of the authorities that may bear upon the sole statutory issue raised here: whether the sum in dispute amounts to earnings ‘from’ employment. In that setting, the Court of Appeal elucidated the ratio in Tilley v Wales [1943] AC 386 and marked out the limits of the ‘replacement principle’ from Mairs v Haughey [1994] 1 AC 303. With those propositions settled, and taking the First- Tier Tribunal’s findings about the nature of the payment and the circumstances in which it was made, the statutory question admitted of a straightforward resolution. What was the background? The respondent sought to lower the expenses tied to running its defined benefit scheme. It put forward several...
Regulatory lawyers indeed anticipate the government will unveil the opening tranche of its planned overhaul of Solvency II rules in June 2024, aiming to spur life insurers to channel additional capital into the wider economy. Ministers are also poised to set out fresh steps intended to foster consolidation across defined benefit and defined contribution pension schemes alike. Many politicians argue that bigger retirement vehicles are more likely to allocate portions of their portfolios to higher-growth assets, including, in particular, technology start-ups. Steve Webb, the former pensions minister, indicated he does not foresee the overarching programme being materially knocked off course, even with a significant chance of a general election in 2024 occurring. The latest date the government can stage a general election is ultimately January 2025. Webb, now a partner at consultancy Lane Clark & Peacock LLP, added that...
Campbell v NHS Business Services Authority [2023] EWCA Civ 1351 What are the practical implications of this case? This judgment confirms that the NHSBSA has been properly administering the 1995 section of the NHS Pension Scheme (the 1995 Scheme), and clarifies that the date of retirement from pensionable employment is extended where leave has accrued but remains untaken. The court went on to make observations about statutory interpretation, with particular emphasis on the nature and operation of ‘deeming’ provisions in practice. It also remarked that it would appear ‘odd’ to be receiving benefits in respect of an employment whilst, at the very same time, accruing further service and paying the contributions upon which those benefits are calculated. The aspect likely to attract the widest interest among litigants is the determination on costs. Ultimately, despite the claimant’s impecuniosity, and...
Auto-enrolment and penalty notices—a reasonable excuse for non-compliance? ( A& P Trading Solutions v Pensions Regulator) A& P Trading Solutions Ltd v Pensions Regulator [2023] UKFTT 772 ( GRC) What are the practical implications of this case? Under section 44 of the Pensions Act 2008 ( PA 2008), an employer may appeal to the FTT against a determination of the Pensions Regulator issuing an unpaid contributions notice ( UCN), a fixed penalty notice, or an escalating penalty notice. In theory, an employer can advance a reasonable excuse for failing to comply with a UCN, which could result in penalty notices being set aside. In reality, attempts to overturn such notices almost always fail. In this matter, the reference relied on the oft-raised contention of reasonable excuse arising from non-receipt of the relevant correspondence. Such submissions must be assessed in light of the facts that (i)...
Cohen and others v O’ Leary (a bankrupt) and others [2023] EWHC 1939 ( Ch) What are the practical implications of this case? Applicants pursuing Bacci v Green relief will generally need comprehensive details of a debtor’s pension before the court is willing to grant it. That includes, for example, the debtor’s rights and benefits under the scheme, the type and features of the scheme, and the identity and particulars of the pension provider. Where such information cannot be obtained readily, applications may need to proceed in two stages, initially seeking an order for further information together with interim protective measures to stop the debtor diminishing those assets. The ruling also offers reassurance to creditors when time is critical. Although permission to commence proceedings against a bankrupt under IA 1986, s 285(3) is usually—and...
Trafalgar Multi Asset Trading Company Ltd (in liquidation) v Hadley and others [2023] EWHC 1184 ( Ch), [2023] All ER ( D) 80 ( May) What are the practical implications of this case? Echoing Financial Conduct Authority v Avocade Ltd [2021] EWCA Civ 1206 and Adams v Options UK Personal Pensions LLP [2021] EWCA Civ 474, this dispute concerns losses borne by pension savers after their transferred monies were placed into inappropriate, high‑risk assets. A notable distinction here is that the claimant was the corporate vehicle through which the savers’ funds were invested, acting by its liquidators. The claim may ultimately enable some recovery of pension savings without individual members, or the FCA, having to commence proceedings. The relevant events date from 2014 to 2016, and it is hoped that changes since then have curtailed the likelihood of transfers into comparable...
Honda Group- UK Pension Scheme Trustee Ltd and others v Mercer Ltd and another [2022] EWHC 3197 ( Ch), [2022] All ER ( D) 75 ( Dec) What are the practical implications of this case? In considering continuing breach, Mr Justice Trower distils the authorities confirming that a professional is generally under no obligation to return to a task once completed. Authorities include New Islington and Hackney Housing Association Ltd v Pollard Thomas & Edwards Ltd [2001] PNLR 20 at [14]–[20], Capita ( Banstead) 2011) Ltd v RFIB Group Ltd [2015] EWCA Civ 1310 at [19]), and PSGS Trust Corp Ltd v Aon UK Ltd [2022] EWHC 2058 ( Ch). As His Honour Judge Richard Seymour QC observed in Tesco Stores Ltd v Costain Construction Ltd [2003] EWHC 1487 ( TCC) at [270], in ordinary life a task considered...
Bacci and others v Green [2022] EWCA Civ 1393, [2022] All ER ( D) 75 ( Oct) What are the practical implications of this case? This ruling highlights the adaptability of injunctive relief and the growing ingenuity of enforcement options open to creditors. The court may issue injunctions requiring debtors to authorise creditors to exercise personal or proprietary rights (without appointing receivers) so that assets are available for enforcement. Creditors who cannot meet debts through more conventional enforcement paths will welcome this. It approves a streamlined delegation of powers instead of the comparatively expensive and drawn-out process of appointing receivers by equitable execution. What was the background? The appellant, Mr Green, had borrowed funds from a lender. After failing to repay, the lender issued proceedings and obtained summary judgment for around £3m. A bankruptcy order was then made against him. As his liability arose from deceit and...
The repeal of 2017 and 2021 reforms from April 2023 has been announced by the UK government as part of the Growth Plan 2022 presented by the Chancellor of the Exchequer in his ’mini budget’ statement to Parliament. This move follows the new Prime Minister’s pledge to review IR35 and forms part of a broader drive to boost economic growth by trimming regulation and cutting taxes. The plan indicates the change will reduce Treasury tax receipts by £1–2bn per year. At first glance, many hirers and suppliers of contract workers are likely to welcome the shift, seeing a chance to revert to more tax‑efficient engagement through personal service company ( PSC) arrangements. Under the current rules, however, clients and suppliers can be on the hook if a PSC worker is, in reality, not truly self‑employed—an assessment that is notoriously...
Popular documents
When evaluating a general damages claim, the practitioner ought initially to refer to the Judicial College Guidelines (JCG)...
This Practice Note This Practice Note reviews mechanisms used in settling litigation. A Tomlin order consists of a consent order paired with a schedule. It operates to stay proceedings on terms that have been agreed. The provisions contained in the schedule may remain confidential. This Practice Note describes the scope of confidentiality attaching to the schedule and sets out how it differs from a standard consent order. Sample wording for a Tomlin order is included, alongside links to precedents, as well as guidance on court approval. It also addresses varying, setting aside and enforcing a Tomlin order, including the considerations the court will take into account when handling applications for each. Further guidance is provided on interpreting and applying the relevant provisions of the CPR; however, some courts and divisions impose very specific requirements for both drafting and approval, and for approaching the schedule and confidentiality issues. Accordingly, you must consider the particular rules and court guide provisions in the forum where your claim is proceeding when drawing up the Tomlin order...
Date [ date ] Parties [ name of Landlord ] [ of OR incorporated in England and Wales (company registration number [ number ]) with its registered office at ] [ address ] (Landlord) [ name of Tenant ] [ of OR incorporated in England and Wales (company registration number [ number ]) with its registered office at ] [ address ] (Tenant) [ [ name of Guarantor ] [ of OR incorporated in England and Wales (company registration number [ number ]) with its registered office at ] [ address ] (Guarantor) ] [ [ name of Mortgagee ] [ of OR incorporated in England and Wales (company registration number [ number ]) with its registered office at ] [ address ] (Mortgagee) ] Definitions Within this Deed, the terms below shall be interpreted as follows: [ Annual Rent • the annual sum reserved under the Lease; ] [ Insurance Rent • the Tenant’s share of the Landlord’s costs of insuring the Property (as set out in the Lease); ] Lease • the lease of the Property dated [ date ], entered into between (1) [ the Landlord OR [ name ...
I, [ name ], of [ address ], solemnly and sincerely state that: [ Matters to be verified, set out in numbered paragraphs ] I make this solemn statement in good conscience, believing it to be true, and pursuant to the provisions of the Statutory Declarations Act 1835. DECLARED at [ details ] this [ day ] day of [ month and year ] Before me ................................................................................ [ signature of the person before whom the declaration is made ] A [ commissioner for oaths OR [ solicitor OR [ insert other qualification ] ] authorised to administer oaths ]...
Discover more from LexisNexis
