Français
Member Login
Search for:
Toggle navigation
Home
About ACPM
Board of Directors
Board Committees 2019-2020
Executive Committee
National Committees
National Policy Committee (NPC)
Natl. Conference Planning Committee (Vancouver, BC)
Executive Membership Engagement Committee (EMEC)
Strategic Initiatives Committee (SIC)
Editorial Committee (EdCom)
National Council
Regional Councils
Alberta Regional Council
Atlantic Regional Council
British Columbia Regional Council
Ontario Regional Council
Prairie Regional Council
Québec Regional Council
Federal Council
ACPM Annual Reports
ACPM Organizational Chart
ACPM Volunteer Recognition Awards
Advocacy
ACPM Publications
Federal Government
Provincial/Territorial Governments
International
Regulators
CAPSA
Archives
DB Plans
ACPM Funding Task Force
Risk Based Pension Plan Monitoring
Solvency
DC Plans
D.C. Plan Payment After Retirement
Guidelines for Capital Accumulation Plans
Investment Related
Income Trust
Investment Rules
Securities Impact on Pension plans
Legal Cases
ACPM Intervention in Legal Cases
Monsanto
Kerry (Canada) Case
Other Surplus Entitlement Cases
Memberships
General Membership
Plan Sponsor Membership Program
Executive Membership
Events
National Conference
Regional Events
Join our mailing list
Members Only
Individual Membership Renewal/Update
ACPM Membership Directory
Newsletters
Event Presentations
2016
2017
2018
Past webinar recordings
2015
2017
2018
By-Laws, Charters & Policies
Annual General Meeting (AGM)
Contact Us
Kerry (Canada) Case
Home
>
Advocacy
>
Archives
>
Legal Cases
>
Kerry (Canada) Case
ISSUE
In June 2007, the Ontario Court of Appeal concluded in Elaine Nolan et al. vs. Kerry (Canada) Inc. et al. (“Kerry”) that plan expenses could be paid from the pension fund in the absence of an explicit prohibition in the plan documents preventing such payment and also condoned contribution holidays taken in respect of a DB/DC arrangement. On January 31, 2008, the Supreme Court of Canada (SCC) agreed to hear an appeal of Kerry. The major questions before the SCC in Kerry are:
- Are the ongoing costs of administering a pension plan properly payable from the pension fund?; and
- Are contribution holidays properly permitted in a pension plan that combines both defined benefit (DB) and defined contribution (DC) provisions?
ACTION TO DATE
As the issues raised in the Kerry appeal are important to occupational pension plans across Canada, ACPM sought leave to intervene in this matter. On August 27, 2008, ACPM was granted leave to intervene by the SCC. In October 2008, ACPM filed a factum with the SCC. In November 2008, ACPM made oral arguments before the SCC at the appeal hearing.
RESULT
Friday, August 7, 2009 - In its decision on the Kerry Canada Inc. case this morning, the Supreme Court of Canada has ruled that an employer may use funds from a defined benefit pension plan to fund a defined contribution plan. The Court also ruled that because the Kerry DC plan was in a surplus situation, the employer was entitled to take a contribution holiday and stop paying into the fund under the trust agreements governing the plan.
To read the complete document, please click
here
.
Careerpost
Executive Members List
The Observer
Retirement Literacy
Marketing Programs
Information Sign up