32 results found

Following a recent Ontario Superior Court decision, pension administrators contemplating modifications to their plans may be obligated to inform plan members of such possible changes before they are implemented.

In a recent case, the Supreme Court of Canada, was asked to examine whether plan members had an equitable interest in the defined benefit surpluses in three federal government pension plans.

Today it seems wherever you turn you find governance as a topical issue. A few short years ago, governance was a subject confined to the discussions of academics and theorists. Today, the headlines are crowded with stories based on governance, or more correctly, the failure of governance systems. The Enron spectacle and the avalanche of corporate scandals that followed have guaranteed that governance is not merely a "flavour of the month" fascination, destined to become a footnote in t

The Canadian Securities Administrators staff have issued Staff Notice 51 – 314 <I>Retirement Benefits Disclosure</I> providing guidelines for disclosure of retirement benefits. The Staff Notice indicates that a number of issuers are presently considering providing enhanced disclosure on retirement benefits payable to executives, which goes beyond that which is required under current securities law requirements.

On January 1, 2004, the <I>Limitations Act, 2002</I> came into force in Ontario. This statute governs the limitation periods applicable to claims governed by the law of Ontario. The new statute makes significant changes to limitation periods generally. These changes will have a significant impact on claims related to pension matters.

On July 29, 2004, the Supreme Court of Canada released its decision in <I>Monsanto Canada Inc. v. Ontario (Superintendent of Financial Service)</I>. The decision creates an obligation for employers who have partially wound-up their defined benefit pension plans to distribute a proportional share of actuarial surplus in the plan as at the partial wind up date. This represents a significant shift in the timing of surplus distribution in Canada. Before the Monsanto case, no court&nbs

Sports Injury And Economic Loss

Legislation, industry guidelines and common law considerations must be weighed if plan administrators and sponsors want to take advantage of Web-based communications with beneficiaries.

As most employers will know, administering a pension plan can be a costly undertaking. Costs arise as a result of many activities undertaken in connection with the operation of a pension plan, such as in respect of actuarial, trustee, auditor, legal and investment management services.</P> <P>Recently, the treatment of pension plan and pension fund administrative costs has been the subject of controversy between plan members and plan administrators. This article will beg

In recent months, there have been numerous rulings, regulatory actions and ongoing proceedings of great interest to pension plans in the courts and before the Financial Services Tribunal. There have also been some discussion and consultation papers of note.

Generally, the LRAMQ provides that every employer shall pay to the Minister of Revenue of Québec a contribution to the Québec health services fund based on a percentage of the total wages that the employer pays or is deemed to pay to its employees who report for work at the employer’s establishment in the province of Québec. The percentage payable varies according to the amount of the total wages, from a minimum of 2.7% to a maximum of 4.26%

In 2000, National Steel Car Limited (NSC) filed an application pursuant to section 81 of the <I>Pension Benefits Act</I> (Ontario) (the PBA) to transfer the assets of its pension plan for salaried employees (the Salaried Plan) to its pension plan for hourly-paid employees (the Hourly Plan). The Salaried Plan had a substantial surplus while the Hourly Plan had an unfunded liability. Following the transfer, the merged plan would still have a surplus and no solvency deficiency.

One consequence of the ever-increasing volume of litigation in the pension area is a clear trend towards more formal documentation of plan sponsor and service provider relationships and, within that documentation, an increasing focus on limitation of liability.

Volatile stock markets, corporate accounting scandals and a depressed US economy are among the factors that have had a significant negative effect on pension plan funding. In fact, according to a recent study by three Canadian consulting firms, that may be an understatement

As in its politics and culture, Québec is a "distinct society" when it comes to the administration of pension plans. Its <I>Supplemental Pension Plans Act</I>(SPPA) includes many requirements that do not exist in other jurisdictions. That said, the basic principles for administering pension plans are quite similar to those in the rest of Canada and, therefore, some recent Québec cases could have cross-country impact.

Since the late 1990s, there has been a significant increase in the number of "class actions" in respect of pension and benefit plans. This trend is attributable to the nature of many pension and benefit claims, increasing sophistication of plan members and their counsel with respect to the claims that may be raised with respect to plans and the possibility of significant financial rewards for successful plaintiffs and their lawyers.

Canadian employers have, for decades, used substantial employment benefits packages to attract and retain employees. These benefits packages often include a variety of post-employment benefits for retirees (including life insurance, prescription drug, supplementary health and dental benefits). For employers, one attractive feature of these retiree benefits is their low up-front costs