HR Trustees Ltd v German and another [2010] EWCA Civ 1349, [2010] All ER (D) 03 (Dec)
Section 91 of the Pensions Act 1995 would not render unenforceable a court-approved compromise of the appeal or cross-appeal. The language of s 91 of the 1995 Act was clear. The section made inalienable the surrender of ‘entitlement’ and ‘right’.
It was directed to cases where there was a deliberate giving up of an actual existing entitlement or an actual existing right. It did not refer to alienating or giving up any right that a person might have. It expressly referred to cases in which a person was entitled to a pension or had a right to a future pension. An established or accepted entitlement or right was clearly within the general language of s 91(1)(a). It implemented the statutory objective that a pension entitlement or right, which enjoyed favourable tax treatment, could not be used as an assignable asset.
It was unlikely that the legislation intended that all disputes about entitlements or rights to pension entitlements were to be resolved by legal proceedings and authoritative determination as a consequence of any risk that
