“The starting point is the duty of trustees to exercise their powers in the best interests of the present and future beneficiaries of the trust.. The duty of the trustees towards their beneficiaries is paramount.“ Megarry J, Cowan v Scargill, a case on a pension fund. 1/4
He continued:”the best interests of the beneficiaries are normally their best financial interests”. In financial regulation, “best interests” is a positive duty on professionals: they must achieve them. The best financial interests of USS members are a Defined Benefit scheme. 2/4
This principle is the legal sun around which all other pensions law moons revolve. The trustee must look to the best interests of the members. That does not entitle them to prioritise employers’ wishes over members best interests. 3/4
We are entitled to much more information, as pension scheme members, than UUK is funnelling to us through USS. The trustee, USS Ltd, is obliged to prioritise our best interests.
So, I believe we should say “no” until they fulfil that duty.
We deserve more. #NoCapitulation 4/4
So, I believe we should say “no” until they fulfil that duty.
We deserve more. #NoCapitulation 4/4
Megarry VC, Cowan v Scargill [1985] Ch 270. A case involving a board of trustees of the mineworkers’ pension fund split between management and the National Union of Mineworkers (led by Arthur Scargill). Scargill overstated his case in ct. #usspensionjustice is doing this properly
We are beneficiaries under a pension trust. Not supplicants. Not just employees in this context.
We have other rights. Legal rights.
The employers can’t give us orders. We are entitled to demand clarification, to hold the trustee to account, until satisfied. #NoCapitulation
We have other rights. Legal rights.
The employers can’t give us orders. We are entitled to demand clarification, to hold the trustee to account, until satisfied. #NoCapitulation
