Bradbury case: Ombudsman determines on employer duty issues in the employer’s imposition of a cap on pensionable pay

The Pensions Ombudsman has ruled that the BBC did not breach its implied duty of trust and confidence and/or the implied term of good faith as an employer when imposing a cap on pensionable pay for the purposes of its pension scheme.

In 2011, Mr Bradbury, a member of the BBC Pension Scheme unsuccessfully brought a case before the Ombudsman relating to a cap that his employer (the BBC) had introduced on his pensionable pay for the purposes of calculating his pension benefits. This cap was part of a package of measures in the context of pay increases that were offered to scheme members such as Mr Bradbury at a time when the scheme was in significant deficit. Members were offered the option of either remaining in membership on their current basis but with any future pay awards being subject to a cap on their pensionable salary, joining a new section of the scheme where the benefits were calculated on a career average basis and pensionable salary would not be subject to a cap or joining a new defined-contribution pension scheme provided by the BBC. The BBC had argued that the scheme rules gave it flexibility to impose the cap on pensionable pay under the first option (and so not only was there no need to change the scheme rules to accommodate that cap, but there was also no need to consult the scheme trustees in that regard).

Mr Bradbury’s complaint was rejected first by an investigator at the Ombudsman’s office and later by the Ombudsman himself, particularly being based on the decision in Trustees of the NUS Superannuation Fund v Pensions Ombudsman [2001] All ER (D) 439, where an employer had offered an increase in salary on the condition that the increase would not count as pensionable earnings. In that case, it was held that it was not open to the member to accept one element of the employer’s offer but not the other. Further, the Ombudsman said that Mr Bradbury’s case was not sustainable because in accepting a pay increase he would know exactly what was being declared for pension purposes and that it was open to the BBC to make such a declaration if the member/employee agreed to it…

Click on the link below to read the rest of the Taylor Wessing briefing.

Sign in or Register to continue reading this article

Sign in


It's quick, easy and free!

It takes just 5 minutes to register. Answer a few simple questions and once completed you’ll have instant access.

Register now

Why register to The Lawyer


Industry insight

In-depth, expert analysis into the stories behind the headlines from our leading team of journalists.


Market intelligence

Identify the major players and business opportunities within a particular region through our series of free, special reports.


Email newsletters

Receive your pick of The Lawyer's daily and weekly email newsletters, tailored by practice area, region and job function.

More relevant to you

To continue providing the best analysis, insight and news across the legal market we are collecting some information about who you are, what you do and where you work to improve The Lawyer and make it more relevant to you.

Briefings from Taylor Wessing

View more briefings from Taylor Wessing

Analysis from The Lawyer

  • merger deal

    Corporate crunch time: who will triumph at The Lawyer Awards 2014?

    As the equity capital markets rocketed back into favour and global M&A saw at least a partial return to form, there have been some rich pickings for The Lawyer’s Corporate Team of the Year award shortlisted firms in 2014. 

  • singapore orchid

    Singapore: Cash course

    The city-state is working hard to become a global wealth management hub, and law firms are gearing up for a prosperous new world

View more analysis from The Lawyer


5 New Street Square

Turnover (£m): 241.20
No. of lawyers: 860 (UK 200)
Jurisdiction: UK
No. of offices: 6
No. of qualified lawyers: 73 (International 50)
No. of partners: 29