Ireland: Pensions Update - Spring 2014

Last Updated: 16 April 2014
Article by Declan Drislane, Sarah McCague, Philip Smith, Orla Ormsby and Catherine Austin
Most Read Contributor in Ireland, October 2018

This update contains summaries of two recent practical court decisions which provide confirmation that trust law in Ireland relating to trustee decision making, related responsibilities and potential liability for breach of trust is consistent with previous expectations. These decisions while welcome do not change the position as it was previously understood. As such they provide a significant degree of comfort that provided that trustees act in good faith, having taken appropriate professional advice, the Courts are very unlikely to interfere with their decisions.

To the extent that there is anything novel in the two decisions, the most significant confirmation is that, as a general principle, it is appropriate for trustees to take into account arrangements being made outside the scheme for active members.

We also provide an update on further EU regulation, the European Market Infrastructure Regulations (EMIR), which affects schemes using derivatives (including those which use them solely for hedging through their custodian). These regulations require pension scheme trustees to organise reporting of the entering into and closing out of derivative transactions in a relatively short timeframe. In most cases this will be dealt with by the custodians (who have reporting obligations) but we are aware that there are some onerous reporting agreements being proposed to trustees which have inappropriate indemnities in them.

Finally we have information updates on the pensions levy and revaluation.


The recent High Court determination in the case of Greene & ors v Coady & ors [2014] IEHC 38 on 4 February, dealt with the standard of care that trustees in Ireland must apply in carrying out their duties in respect of pension schemes.


The judgment provides confirmation under Irish case law on the manner in which trustees of pension schemes should conduct themselves and the level of care that is required in order for trustees to be considered to have carried out their responsibilities effectively and in a manner that is in the best interests of the beneficiaries of the scheme. The case confirms the state of the law on a number of issues such as: how trustees make decisions; whether it is appropriate for trustees to take into account external considerations (such as job security and contributions to other schemes for active members); and what constitutes "wilful default" in considering whether there has been a breach of trust.

Trustees can take comfort that the Courts will not lightly entertain a challenge to their decisions where they have acted honestly, in good faith and on professional advice.


Set out below are some of the key confirmations arising from the case.

124 members of the Element Six Limited Pension Scheme, the principal employer of which was Element Six Limited sued the Scheme trustees for breach of trust by accepting an offer from Element Six Limited of €37.1 million instead of demanding the entire minimum funding standard funding deficit of €129.2 million. Among the complaints of the members were that the trustees acted in "wilful default" of their duties; that they were conflicted in their duties; and that they considered irrelevant factors in reaching their decision to accept the Company's offer.

The plaintiffs' claim failed on all grounds. The judge concluded that the trustees had conducted their duties in a manner that was honest and in the best interests of the members of the Scheme.


The case endorses the familiar formula for trustee decision making and case confirms that the Court does not apply its own judgment in relation to the facts. Instead the Court considers the trustees' position at the time of making the decision and the materials that were or ought to have been available to the trustees in reaching their decision. It then considers whether the trustees acted in good faith for the benefit of the members of the Scheme. Once a factor is relevant, it is a matter for the trustees to decide how much weight to attach to it, even if the Court might have considered the factor to be of greater or lesser importance. Therefore, unless the weight attached to a factor was outside the range of what a reasonable body of trustees would have given to it, the trustees' decision would stand.


Beneficiaries are entitled to expect that trustees pursue the trust's aims and objectives in an honest manner and in good faith. The judge noted that this cannot happen if a conflict of interest or duty is such as to "paralyse any trustee so that he or she cannot rationally approach and decide upon a problem."

It was noted that sometimes in pension schemes there are unavoidable conflicts of interest because trustees often owe duties to their employer in respect of their contract of employment and duties to members in respect of the Scheme. This kind of conflict is often unavoidable but not sufficient to warrant the appointment of professional trustees. However, where a trustee assumes responsibilities or duties which are outside the normal contemplation of duties associated with the trust, and which conflict with the trustee's duties to the trust, that would be considered a breach of trust.


The High Court has inherent jurisdiction to assist trustees who find themselves in situations of conflict. The plaintiffs argued that the trustees ought to have applied to the court for assistance in considering the company's offer. They argued that the trustees should have asked the court whether they should demand greater contributions from the company or whether they should accept the Company's contention that if the trustees were to pursue the level contributions that the Shannon plant would be forced to close. The Judge held that while the trustees did have discretion to ask the court for assistance in making the decision, the mere fact that they did not choose to exercise this discretion did not invalidate their decision.


The plaintiffs' claim that the trustees acted with wilful default by failing to make a contribution demand was considered and it was decided that in order for the trustees to be found liable for wilful default, it would be necessary for the beneficiaries to show that the trustees' decision in refraining from making a contribution demand was made consciously and was known to be a purposeful breach of duty. It was held that if a failure to act is voluntary, then in order for liability to be found, it would be necessary to prove that the trustees acted in a manner that infringed the core duties of managing the trust honestly and in good faith. On the facts, it was found that there was no evidence of the trustees acting in a manner that could be described as dishonest or in bad faith and therefore no wilful default was found.

This decision confirms that "wilful default" is something more than an intentional breach of trust and eliminates the line of argument put forward by some commentators that an intentional breach of trust amounted to wilful default. The importance of this decision is that where trustees, as a result of unforeseen circumstances, are faced with two unpalatable decisions both of which are arguably in breach of a duty - the fact that trustees must choose one of the courses of action does not amount to an actionable breach of trust where that choice has been made properly, honestly and in good faith. The case confirms that the hurdle faced by members attempting to demonstrate bad faith is a high one.


While not strictly at issue in the case, the Court expressed the view on the facts that the funding proposal amounted to a contract between the company as funder and the trustees. As such the judge felt that, on the particular facts of the case, the trustees had a right to sue the company in respect of the contributions due. However, the trustees had received legal advice that the funding proposal might not be interpreted as binding before the courts. Relying on this legal opinion did not make their decision to refrain from issuing a contribution demand in respect of the outstanding sum irresponsible.


The case confirms that the threats of closure of the Company did appear to be serious and that the trustees were entitled to take those threats and the potential loss of employment into account when refusing to issue contribution demands to the Company. It was also appropriate to take into account that some of the monies from the company were to be paid to another Defined Contribution (DC) arrangement for the benefit of active members.


The "EMIR" EU regulation was established on 16th August 2012. It is a measure proposed to ensure greater transparency in the financial system. In particular, it aims to regulate over-thecounter derivatives (OTCs) which are "privately negotiated contracts." Pension funds which use derivatives e.g. to hedge against interest rate, inflation or currency risks, fall within the scope of EMIR albeit with some exemptions from the full force of the Regulation. In practice dealing with the detail is likely to be delegated to the manager dealing with the derivatives or a scheme's custodian. However, the trustees remain responsible for ensuring compliance.


Trustees of schemes using derivatives can expect to see EMIR reporting agreements from their custodian or derivative manager. These agreements are based on a template prepared by ISDA (the international swaps and derivatives association). Unsurprisingly not all of the terms of the agreement (which is targeted at financial trading institutions) are appropriate for pension scheme trustees and it may be appropriate to seek amendments to the standard documents.


EMIR divides market participants in derivatives into two categories-1. Financial Counterparties (FCs) and 2. non-financial counterparties (NFCs). Pension schemes are included in the FC category. EMIR is targeted at financial institutions (banks, hedge funds, custodians) and pension funds have been exempted from compliance with some aspects for a considerable period (see below).


From 12 February 2014, trustees of pension schemes or investment funds will have to report any new OTC derivatives or exchange traded derivatives which they enter into to the Trade Repository within one business day of entering the contract. In order to do this, trustees must acquire a Global Legal Entity Identifier (LEI) LEIs are essentially reference codes which identify parties who engage in financial transactions. Trustees are entitled to delegate their duty to report to investment managers.

Any amendments to the terms of derivative transactions and any early terminations of derivative transactions must also be reported from 12 February 2014 onwards. Any derivative transactions that were entered into on or after 16 August 2012 and which remain outstanding on 12 February 2014 also have to be reported on 12 February 2014. Generally, both counterparties to a transaction are required to report on that transaction. However, one counterparty may report on behalf of the other if there is a prior agreement to do so.


All counterparties are also under an obligation to maintain a record of concluded or modified derivative transactions for at least five years after they have been concluded/ modified.


Pension schemes have been exempted from the clearing requirements for certain derivative trades until 2015.


The UK Pensions Ombudsman recently confirmed that it is not a breach of the employer's duty of good faith to use an amendment in an employment contract to achieve changes to a pension scheme.

Mr Bradbury, a BBC employee and member of its defined benefit pension scheme, made a complaint to the UK Pensions Ombudsman in relation to the BBC's decision to introduce a 1% cap on increases to pensionable salary. Mr Bradbury complained that the 1% cap was unlawful on the grounds that it was a breach of the implied duties of trust and confidence or good faith by the BBC to effect the change through its employees' contracts of employment.

The initial complaint in three parts was dismissed by the Ombudsman. On appeal the High Court upheld the Ombudsman's decision on two parts and referred the third part regarding the breach of trust and confidence back to the Ombudsman.

The Ombudsman dismissed Mr Bradbury's complaint ruling that the BBC had not been unreasonable in its approach to addressing the deficit and it was noted that the 1% cap was primarily introduced to ameliorate the problem of the scheme deficit rather than to be detrimental to the employees.


This decision is not binding in either the UK or Ireland but the UK Ombudsman's careful reasoning and conclusion that there were no collateral motives inconsistent with duty of good faith offer support for this method of approaching pension change where there are restrictions in a scheme's amendment power.


Pursuant to s.33 of the Pension Act 1990, the Minister for Social Protection, Joan Burton, signed a new Statutory Regulation (S.I. No. 71 of 2014) into law on 30th January 2014 which states that there is to be an increase/revaluationof 0.5% in preserved pension benefits for 2013. This percentage increase is referenced to the increase in the consumer price index (CPI) in 2013 of 0.5%.


The new increase will be most pertinent to employers who operate Career Average Revalued Earnings (CARE) schemes, benefits under which are revalued in line with the CPI. All pension arrangements are subject to an annual Government pension levy of 0.75% payable in 2014. (The previous levy was at 0.6%) It may therefore be preferable for employers who operate CARE Schemes to have the annual levy for 2013 paid out of the increase in benefits. This would mean that pensioners would not actually receive the increase to their benefits for the year 2013, but would at least not have their benefits significantly reduced in order to pay the pension levy.

In cases where the trustees have accepted that the levy will be passed on to members, trustees will need to decide whether to roll over the "unallocated" levy of 0.25% and take it from next year's pension/revaluation increase (along with the 2015 levy of 0.15%).

This article contains a general summary of developments and is not a complete or definitive statement of the law. Specific legal advice should be obtained where appropriate.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Arthur Cox
Arthur Cox
Arthur Cox
In association with
Related Topics
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Arthur Cox
Arthur Cox
Arthur Cox
Related Articles
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Worldwide Updates
Registration (you must scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of

To Use you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.


The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.


Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions