Ian Gordon

Leading our Pensions Disputes practice, Ian helps clients to resolve legal issues involving occupational pension schemes.

With clear explanation and analysis, he makes what can be complex issues accessible for all concerned in order to resolve cases as speedily and as cost-effectively as possible. Where their interests are directly affected, he deals with scheme members with appropriate sensitivity.

He has experience of a wide variety of pension disputes and clients value the insights he can bring to their cases so that problems are resolved in not only their technical but also their commercial context.

Ian has advised on the pension schemes of a number of household names, including Britvic, Axminster Carpets, Mitchells & Butlers and Austin Reed.

Client have praised Ian for:

  • his "formidable and acute command of the legal arguments and how to play them";
  • providing "outstanding advice and service … throughout the many twists and turns in the case";
  • his "clear, pragmatic and robust approach";
  • "always [getting] straight to the heart of the matter, with insight, crisp delivery and periodic flashes of keen wit";
  • being "approachable, readily contactable and [dealing] with matters with calmness, impressive efficiency and speed."

Experience

Ian's experience includes:

  • Acting for the Trustee of the Mitchells & Butlers Pension Plan and the members it represented in ground-breaking High Court proceedings concerning the pension increase rules in that scheme.
  • Acting for the Trustee of the Axminster Carpets Group Retirement Benefits Plan in what is the leading case concerning forfeiture, limitation and interest in a pensions context.
  • Acting for the Trustee of the Britvic Pension Plan in the Court of Appeal case on the interpretation of that scheme's pension increase rules.
  • Acting on the successful appeal to the High Court from the Pensions Ombudsman's determination in the Butterworth case.
  • Acting for members in various cases in which employers sought rectification of the schemes' rules, all of which were resolved by summary judgment, one by expedition to enable a corporate transaction to go ahead.