Login here
Podcast Location:
Download it here [file size: 19.1 MB]
Law Categories:
Pensions Law
CPD Points:
Up to one point - details »

Due to the difference in guidelines between the SRA and the Bar Standards Board, CPD points are awarded differently for Solicitors, Barristers and Legal Executives:

Regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority / ILEX:
Listen and pass the quiz: Gain 1 CPD point (60 minutes)
Listen only, gain ½ a CPD point (30 minutes)

Regulated by the Bar Standards Board:
Listen and pass the quiz: Gain ½ an accredited CPD point (30 minutes)
Listen only, gain ½ a CPD point (30 minutes)

Cost:
Standard rate: £25+VAT - Corporate users will pay less.
Special Offer:   1: Download this CPDcast FREE   2: Get this year's CPD for just £199
Length:
30 minutes of audio
(+ optional 5 minute online quiz)
Plays on Computer:
Yes Downloadable as MP3:    Yes
Contributor(s):
Course Aims:

This podcast is aimed at pensions practitioners, or those with an interest in the area, to provide an update and insight to issues of construction and rectification in the context of pension schemes.

Outcomes:
After completing the course you will:
  • Understand the key principles from the ICS decision;
  • Understand how these principles are applicable in the pensions context;
  • Learn about the different categorisation of ‘mistake’ cases and how the recent approach to construction applies to each category;
  • Have received an update on the most important pensions cases involving issues of construction.
Level:
Specialist Difficulty: of 5
Classification:
Case Update
Legal Principles
Sources and References:
  • Investors Compensation Scheme Ltd. v. West Bromwich Building Society [1998] 1 W.L.R. 896;
  • Charter Reinsurance Co. Ltd. v. Fagan [1997] A.C. 313;
  • The Starsin (Homburt Houtimport BV v. Agrosin Private Ltd.) [2004] 1 A.C. 715;
  • Littman v. Aspen Oil (Broking) Ltd. (2005) N.P.C. 150;
  • KPMG v. Network Rail Infrastructure Ltd. [2006] EWHC 67;
  • Mannai Investment Co. Ltd. v. Eagle Star Life Assurance Co. Ltd. [1997] A.C. 749;
  • Bank of Credit and Commerce International S.A. v. Ali [2002 1 A.C. 251;
  • British Airways Pension Trustees Ltd. v. British Airways Plc at [2002] P.L.R. 247;
  • Re Courage Group’s Pension Schemes [1987] 1 W.L.R. 495;
  • National Grid Co. Plc v. Laws and Mayes [2001] 1 W.L.R. 864;
  • The Law Debenture Trust Plc v. Lonrho Africa Trade & Finance Ltd. [2003] P.L.R. 13;
  • Lansing Linde Ltd. v. Alber [2000] P.L.R. 15;
  • AMP(UK) Plc v. Barker [2001] P.L.R. 77;
  • Gallagher Ltd. v. Gallagher Pensions Ltd. [2005] P.L.R.;
  • Drake Insurance v. McDonald [2005] P.L.R. 401;
  • Z F Lemforder UK Pension Trustee Ltd. v. Lemforder UK Pension Trustee Ltd. [2005] EWHC 2882 (Ch);
  • Hearn v. Younger [[2005] P.L.R. 49;
  • Harwood Smart v. Caws [2000] P.L.R. 101;
  • Gibbon v. Mitchell [1990] 1 W.L.R. 1304;
  • Re Hastings-Bass [1975] Ch. 25.

This is part one of a two part podcast on restrictive construction and rectification in the context of pension schemes with Elizabeth Ovey, a barrister specialising in pensions at Radcliffe Chambers. Both parts of the podcast are taken from an interview with Elizabeth and it is important to listen to both parts to fully understand the topic. In this first half of the interview, we deal with construction and the change in the court’s approach to questions of construction in the last decade. We discuss the principles applicable from the 1998 House of Lords case Investors Compensation Scheme Ltd v West Bromwich Building Society and the basis on which questions of construction are usually decided.

Podcast Added: 18/8/2008

Download this CPDcast

© CPDcast.com