The High Court ordered trustees of the Irish Express Cargo staff retirement benefit scheme to give scheme members information about how pension transfer payments were calculated in 1995 and how a proposed additional payment would be calculated.
Carroll J made the order on 16 March 2005 after hearing an application brought by special summons. The plaintiffs sought access to scheme documents and reports concerning the transfer of staff from the original Irish Express Cargo scheme to a separate staff scheme. The court’s order covered information about the methodology and calculations for the 1995 transfer and the proposed payment. It did not order disclosure of every document listed in the summons.
The judgment recounts that the staff scheme was established in 1995 as a defined contribution scheme, while the original scheme initially continued as a defined benefit scheme for management and directors. The members said they wanted information about the apportionment of the original scheme’s assets and the calculations used for their transfers.
The trustees had provided certain scheme documents and said the reports requested by the members were prepared for the company or the trustees of the original scheme. They also claimed legal professional privilege over reports prepared for separate expert proceedings. The judgment records that three trustees served on both the original and staff schemes. The judge said their dual roles might create a conflict of interest.
The trustees’ replying affidavit said the company had agreed to provide €1.75 million to augment transfer payments for relevant former members who moved to the staff scheme. The proposed augmentations were based on a comparison with a 156% leaving-service transfer value, plus investment returns to 17 November 2003. The judge considered the additional payment evidence that the earlier apportionment might have been flawed and said members had not been told how the miscalculation arose.
Applying the court’s supervisory jurisdiction over trusts, Carroll J concluded the members were entitled to the information sought about the original transfer calculations and methodology, as well as the calculations for the proposed payment. The judge said the trustees should obtain the information if they did not already have it. The judgment also stated that the third report by Derek McNamee was not protected by legal privilege and should be obtained if necessary.
The order was for information about those methods and calculations. The judgment did not determine the final amount due to each member or make a finding of wrongdoing.