Summary

The court granted rectification of a deed of amendment to a pension scheme where the evidence leading up to and post-dating the deed compellingly established that a mistake had been made in drafting the deed which did not reflect the intention of the company and the trustees.

Facts

The claimant company applied for summary judgment on its claim for rectification of a deed of amendment to a pension scheme.

The company and the pension trustees had resolved to amend the rules of the scheme in 1998 to reduce the rate at which annual increases were made to benefits in payment and in deferment. By mistake the administrators of the scheme drafted the deed of amendment so that it changed the benefits in payment only. The first defendant beneficiary of the pension scheme did not oppose the relief sought.

Held

The first defendant was an appropriate person to represent the members of the scheme and he was right to accept that, on the evidence before the court, there was no arguable defence to the claim nor other good reason for the trial to take place. Every possible defence had been investigated and rejected. The evidence leading up to and post-dating the deed compellingly established that a mistake had been made in drafting the deed. The intention of the company and the trustees to amend the pension scheme in relation to benefits in payment and in deferment had been defeated, IBM Pension Plan, Re [2012] EWHC 2766 (Ch), [2012] Pens. L.R. 469 applied. The court granted the declaration sought (see paras 23-26, 28-29 of judgment).