Keith Rowley KC and Henry Day acted on behalf of the claimant sponsoring employer, Sogefi Filtration Ltd, in proceedings concerning whether, following the decisions of the European Court of Justice in Barber v. Guardian Royal Exchange Assurance Group  1 Q.B. 344 and Coloroll Pension Trustees Ltd. v. Russell  All E.R. (EC) 23, male and female members’ normal retirement dates under two defined benefit occupational pension schemes had been equalised: Sogefi sought declarations as to the validity of certain amendments to the schemes and rectification of two scheme deeds.
Shortly before trial terms of compromise were agreed between Sogefi and the fifth defendant, Mr. Barker, a pensioner member of one of the schemes who had been joined as a representative beneficiary to represent the interests of all members opposed to Sogefi’s claim.
Sogefi and Mr. Barker applied to Court under CPR r.19.7(2) for orders that Mr. Barker be appointed as a representative beneficiary and that Sogefi be appointed to represent those members in whose interests it was for Sogefi to be granted the relief sought, and under CPR r.19.7(6) for approval of the compromise as being for the benefit of the represented members.