Pensions analysis: The Pensions Ombudsman (PO) has rejected a complaint that a pension scheme wrongly returned half of a surplus to an employer. Martin Scott of gunnercooke LLP looks at the decision.

Dispute Resolution analysis: This judgment considers the standing requirements for bringing a common law derivative claim and provides a useful summary of the principles applicable to the test for permission at common law. On the facts of this case, permission to bring a multiple derivative claim at common law was refused. The claimants had sought to argue standing by means of beneficial interest in the companies’ shares but, since they were suing in their capacity as trustees, they were not the beneficial owners of the shares and accordingly did not have sufficient interest to pursue the claim on a derivative basis on behalf of those companies. Written by Phillip Patterson, barrister, at Hardwicke.

Pensions analysis: The Pensions Ombudsman has upheld a complaint about the payment of death benefits. Martin Scott of gunnercooke LLP looks at the decision.

Pensions analysis: The Deputy Pensions Ombudsman has rejected a complaint about a transfer value. Martin Scott of gunnercooke LLP looks at the decision.

Two founding trustees of Jole Rider Friends, a charity providing facilities and equipment to schools in Africa, were found to have taken unauthorised payments of £322,500 from the charity’s fund, breached the charity’s constitution and failed to submit accounts, annual reports and returns on time, resulting in their disqualification from acting as trustees or in a senior management position at a charity for 12 years.

Pensions analysis: The Pensions Ombudsman’s Pensions Dishonesty Unit (PDU) concluded an extensive investigation into three occupational pension schemes in November 2024, resulting in directions for trustees to repay over £5.2m into the schemes. The Ombudsman found that scheme funds were invested in breach of trustee investment duties, facilitating pension liberation arrangements by trustees in a position of conflicting interests. Trustees, including two individuals in their personal capacities, were found to have acted dishonestly and attracted personal liability. A pension administrator was also found liable as a dishonest assistant. This case highlights the Pensions Ombudsman’s efforts to combat pension fraud and hold dishonest actors accountable. Ben Fairhead, partner, and Tom Cosgrove, associate, at Arc Pensions Law look at the background to the case, the Ombudsman’s findings and the implications for pension schemes.

The Investment Consultants Sustainability Working Group (ICSWG) has launched its Investment Stewardship Alignment Tool to assist asset owners in assessing the extent to which their investment managers' stewardship activities align with their own expectations. The ICSWG's tool provides a structured framework, including a flow chart, enabling asset owners to compare their responsible investment position and stewardship expectations with managers' proxy voting decisions and engagement activities. Representatives from the ICSWG's member firms stated that the tool is intended to support more effective and transparent discussions between asset owners and investment managers, and to support trustees in their monitoring processes, following the Financial Markets Law Committee's 2024 paper on fiduciary duties in relation to stewardship oversight.

Trustees owe a duty of care pursuant to section 1 of the Trustee Act 2000 (TA 2000) to manage trust funds properly for the benefit of the beneficiaries. In particular, trustees owe a specific duty when investing trust funds to have regard to the Standard Investment Criteria, set out in TA 2000, s 4, which include the need for diversification of investments and to consider the suitability of any proposed or current investment for the needs of the trust. When holding funds for the benefit of income and capital beneficiaries, the trustees are required to maintain a fair balance between the interests

We have assumed that the trust property is land. The question refers to the property which was settled by the father being held on protective trusts for the son (S) and daughter (D), but the question also refers to the trustees having a power of appointment, which is inconsistent with the provisions of a protective trust. If the trusts are protective trusts, as set out in section 33 of the Trustee Act 1925, they would give life interests to S and D, which will be automatically forfeited on the occurrence of certain events. Generally speaking, where a beneficiary of a trust becomes absolutely entitled

The answer to this scenario will depend on the terms of the loan agreement and the terms of the trust deed. It will further depend upon whether the lay trustee is also a beneficiary of the trust. In these circumstances, see Practice Notes: • Trustees—duties, which explains that

The general rule is that trustees must follow accounting and trust principles and treat capital and income according to their nature and distribute accordingly. Occasionally there will be an overriding power of appointment which could be used in respect of appointing capital to the life tenant, but we assume there is no such power in the trust instrument in this case. We assume the trustee has invested directly in the investment bonds, rather than via an underlying holding company. In the latter case,

Pensions analysis: In the determination BWFS Occupational Pension Scheme, PO-26647 the Pensions Ombudsman has upheld a complaint that pension scheme trustees had committed multiple breaches of trust, breach of statutory duties and maladministration. Furthermore, the Ombudsman found that the trustees could not rely on the scheme’s exoneration clause as, on an objective finding, no reasonable trustee could have acted as they did. Martin Scott of gunnercooke LLP looks at the decision.