About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline

LOG IN
LOG IN


7 Denning L.J. 1 (1992)

handle is hein.journals/denlj7 and id is 1 raw text is: Pensions and Retirement on the Agenda Helen Desmond* In the last year or so it appears that not a day goes by without something on pensions being mentioned in the press or on the media. When it emerged, in December 1991, that anomalies had been discovered in pension funds of companies the late Robert Maxwell had controlled, anomalies which were subsequently revealed as £420 million in missing assets, pensions were already firmly on the agenda. That event (described as a spectacular fraud) ensured that it would remain so, probably until legislation is introduced to set an entirely new single statutory framework for the operation of pension funds. The problem which has to be faced in so doing is to find the middle ground between assuring the individual that his financial contributions will be well looked after and produce a reasonable pension at the end of the day, being protected from the various catastrophes which can occur along the way, and encouraging employers to continue to believe that the increased costs and inconvenience of complying with protections are in fact worthwhile and that it is in their interests to continue to provide a company based scheme for employees' pension provision. The alternative scenario is to change fundamentally the way in which financial provision is made post retirement, which could involve the employer, or series of employers, in financial contributions but not in administration or pension payment. Existing agenda items The decision of the European Court in May 1990 in Barber v. Guardian Royal Exchange Assurance Group,' raised the profile of pensions considerably. The resulting high profile campaign by the pensions industry as to their preferred interpretation of the Barber judgment, together with a host of cases,2 has meant *Lecturer in Law, University of Buckingham. 1. (Case 262/88) [1990] I.R.L.R. 240. 2. Roscoe v. HickHargreaves [1991] (EAT/205/91 Lexis); W. F. Lee v. Shell U.K. (unreported); Keary, Roberts & Searle v. Gullick Dobson Ltd. [1991] (unreported); Neath v. Hugh Steeper Ltd. [1991] P.L.R. 91; and see Helen Desrmond, A tangled web: Barber and beyond - a research report, (1992) I.R.J. Vol. 23, No. 3.