174:
significant part of the consideration for the premiums paid. And the directors' discretions as to the amount and distribution of bonuses are conferred for the benefit of policyholders. In this context the self-evident commercial object of the inclusion of guaranteed rates in the policy is to protect the policyholder against a fall in market annuity rates by ensuring that if the fall occurs he will be better off than he would have been with market rates. The choice is given to the GAR policyholder and not to the
Society. It cannot be seriously doubted that the provision for guaranteed annuity rates was a good selling point in the marketing by the Society of the GAR policies. It is also obvious that it would have been a significant attraction for purchasers of GAR policies. The Society points out that no special charge was made for the inclusion in the policy of GAR provisions. So be it. This factor does not alter the reasonable expectations of the parties. The supposition of the parties must be presumed to have been that the directors would not exercise their discretion in conflict with contractual rights. These are the circumstances in which the directors of the Society resolved upon a differential policy which was designed to deprive the relevant guarantees of any substantial value. In my judgment an implication precluding the use of the directors' discretion in this way is strictly necessary. The implication is essential to give effect to the reasonable expectations of the parties. The stringent test applicable to the implication of terms is satisfied.
117:
proceeds with the higher terminal bonus times the CAR rate equalled the policy proceeds with lower terminal bonus times the GAR rate (the
Differential Terminal Bonus Policy - DTBP). The Equitable's Annual Regulatory Returns, submitted each year to the regulatory authorities (the Department of Trade and Industry - DTI) had set out this practice since the 1993 (when the current annuity rate first fell below the guaranteed annuity rate). The Equitable's Annual Regulatory Returns had been scrutinized each year by the regulatory authorities and nothing adverse had been said by the regulatory authorities about the Equitable's Differential Terminal Bonus Policy (which had been introduced in 1993).
135:
the powers of the directors. It is impossible to assign to the language of article 65(1) by construction a restriction precluding the directors from overriding GARs. To this extent I would uphold the submissions made on behalf of the
Society. The critical question is whether a relevant restriction may be implied into article 65(1). It is certainly not a case in which a term can be implied by law in the sense of incidents impliedly annexed to particular forms of contracts. Such standardised implied terms operate as general default rules: see
130:
having quoted the higher terminal bonus on each GAR policyholders' annual bonus notice (no other life office had quoted terminal bonus in its annual bonus notices to policyholders as terminal bonus can only be determined at policy maturity because of the volatility of financial markets). Although there was no express term in
Equitable Life's constitution that constrained the discretion of the directors, it was necessary to imply such a term to uphold the policyholders' reasonable expectations. Lord Steyn gave the leading judgment.
155:"The expression 'implied term' is used in different senses. Sometimes it denotes some term which does not depend on the actual intention of the parties but on a rule of law, such as the terms, warranties or conditions which, if not expressly excluded, the law imports, as for instance under the Sale of Goods Act and the Marine Insurance Act. . . . But a case like the present is different because what it is sought to imply is based on an intention imputed to the parties from their actual circumstances."
28:
170:. This principle is sparingly and cautiously used and may never be employed to imply a term in conflict with the express terms of the text. The legal test for the implication of such a term is a standard of strict necessity. This is how I must approach the question whether a term is to be implied into article 65(1) which precludes the directors from adopting a principle which has the effect of overriding or undermining the GARs.
109:(i.e. with a payment annually), then they got tax exemptions on the premiums (and bonuses at the end of the year). They could choose to have their annuity at a "guaranteed annual rate" ("GAR") that would be fixed, or a "current annuity rate" ("CAR") that would fluctuate according to the market. The choice did not affect the premium. From 1993 the current annuity fell below the guaranteed one. Article 65 of the Equitable Life's
205:
Equitable Life almost collapsed after the case, because it was unable to meet its additional liability to GAR policyholders, and had to sell assets and close to new business. It triggered an explosion of litigation and bitter recrimination among policyholders, directors, auditors, regulators and the
134:
It is necessary to distinguish between the processes of interpretation and implication. The purpose of interpretation is to assign to the language of the text the most appropriate meaning which the words can legitimately bear. The language of article 65(1) contains no relevant express restriction on
159:
It is only an individualised term of the second kind which can arguably arise in the present case. Such a term may be imputed to parties: it is not critically dependent on proof of an actual intention of the parties. The process "is one of construction of the agreement as a whole in its commercial
129:
The House of Lords unanimously agreed that there was an implied term in the
Articles of Association such that the directors of Equitable Life could not exercise their discretion in the way they had because it defeated the reasonable expectations of the GAR policyholders as exemplified by Equitable
120:
In 1998, because the GAR policyholders received a lower terminal bonus than they expected (they expected the higher terminal bonus and, in addition, the GAR rate) certain GAR policyholders complained. Mr Hyman was a representative policyholder. At no point, however, were the GAR policyholders ever
173:
The enquiry is entirely constructional in nature: proceeding from the express terms of article 65, viewed against its objective setting, the question is whether the implication is strictly necessary. My Lords, as counsel for the GAR policyholders observed, final bonuses are not bounty. They are a
177:
In substantial agreement with Lord Woolf MR I would hold that the directors were not entitled to adopt a principle of making the final bonuses of GAR policyholders dependent on how they exercised their rights under the policy. In adopting the principle of a differential policy in respect of GAR
116:
The directors of
Equitable Life decided they would reduce the level of terminal bonuses for GAR policyholders, from the higher figure shown on the GAR policyholders' annual bonus notices, to a lower figure (if necessary to zero) so as to equalise the benefits so far as possible i.e. the policy
121:
paid less per annum (and nor was there ever any intention by the directors of
Equitable Life to pay them less) than their guaranteed fund (i.e. excluding the non-contractual terminal bonus) times guaranteed annuity rate.
141:
1 AC 294. If a term is to be implied, it could only be a term implied from the language of article 65 read in its particular commercial setting. Such implied terms operate as ad hoc gap fillers. In
184:
143:
491:
162:
358:
444:
137:
182:
Lord Cooke added that the discretion could be struck down, no matter how broadly it was drafted, in the same way as happens in administrative law (
462:
403:
372:
235:
452:
106:
542:
278:
495:
98:
532:
471:
228:
113:
said the directors could, at their discretion, vary bonuses and the company had relied on this since its foundation.
316:
290:
537:
432:
221:
190:
87:
66:
148:
197:
Lords Slynn, Hoffmann and
Hobhouse concurred with both. £1.5b of annuities needed to be paid in full.
423:
304:
110:
105:
policies, which are a way of saving for retirement. If policy holders took benefits as a taxable
83:
8:
362:
256:
456:
408:
194:). The result of the discretion would not be consistent with the purpose of the policy.
393:
378:
348:
332:
466:
294:
79:
52:
418:
328:
252:
388:
102:
33:
526:
167:
266:
213:
27:
178:
policyholders the directors acted in breach of article 65(1).
163:
Banque
Bruxelles Lambert SA v Eagle Star Insurance Co Ltd
492:"Judgments - Equitable Life Assurance Society v. Hyman"
445:Scally v Southern Health and Social Services Board
138:Scally v Southern Health and Social Services Board
524:
463:Attorney General of Belize v Belize Telecom Ltd
374:Attorney General of Belize v Belize Telecom Ltd
229:
453:Crossley v Faithful & Gould Holdings Ltd
236:
222:
26:
359:Baird Textile Holdings Ltd v M&S plc
344:Equitable Life Assurance Society v Hyman
76:Equitable Life Assurance Society v Hyman
21:Equitable Life Assurance Society v Hyman
279:Southern Foundries (1926) Ltd v Shirlaw
243:
151:explained this distinction as follows:
32:Equitable Life's early offices were in
525:
217:
404:Yam Seng v International Trade Corp
13:
472:Equitable Life (Payments) Act 2010
185:Padfield v Minister of Agriculture
14:
554:
101:(est 1762) issued ‘with profits’
494:. House of Lords. Archived from
409:[2013] EWHC 111 (QB)
543:2000 in United Kingdom case law
200:
144:Luxor (Eastbourne) Ltd v Cooper
510:
484:
317:Scally v Southern Health Board
1:
477:
433:Implied terms in English law
191:Howard Smith Ltd v Ampol Ltd
7:
363:[2001] EWCA Civ 274
209:
124:
10:
559:
533:English contract case law
430:
415:
400:
385:
369:
355:
339:
325:
313:
305:Johnstone v Bloomsbury HA
301:
287:
275:
263:
249:
64:
59:
48:
40:
25:
20:
93:
111:Articles of Association
379:[2009] UKPC 10
349:[2000] UKHL 39
333:[1997] UKHL 23
180:
157:
295:[1976] UKHL 1
153:
132:
538:House of Lords cases
291:Liverpool CC v Irwin
84:English contract law
498:on 7 September 2008
244:Implied terms cases
188:) and private law (
166:AC 191, 212E, per
439:
438:
86:case, concerning
72:
71:
550:
517:
514:
508:
507:
505:
503:
488:
375:
345:
238:
231:
224:
215:
214:
65:Life insurance,
30:
18:
17:
558:
557:
553:
552:
551:
549:
548:
547:
523:
522:
521:
520:
515:
511:
501:
499:
490:
489:
485:
480:
440:
435:
426:
419:Bhasin v Hrynew
411:
396:
381:
373:
365:
351:
343:
335:
329:Malik v BCCI SA
321:
309:
297:
283:
271:
270:(1889) 14 PD 64
259:
253:Hutton v Warren
245:
242:
212:
203:
127:
96:
36:
12:
11:
5:
556:
546:
545:
540:
535:
519:
518:
509:
482:
481:
479:
476:
475:
474:
469:
459:
449:
437:
436:
431:
428:
427:
416:
413:
412:
401:
398:
397:
389:Carter v Boehm
386:
383:
382:
370:
367:
366:
356:
353:
352:
340:
337:
336:
326:
323:
322:
314:
311:
310:
302:
299:
298:
288:
285:
284:
276:
273:
272:
264:
261:
260:
250:
247:
246:
241:
240:
233:
226:
218:
211:
208:
202:
199:
126:
123:
103:life assurance
99:Equitable Life
95:
92:
70:
69:
62:
61:
57:
56:
50:
46:
45:
44:House of Lords
42:
38:
37:
34:Coleman Street
31:
23:
22:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
555:
544:
541:
539:
536:
534:
531:
530:
528:
516:1 AC 408, 459
513:
497:
493:
487:
483:
473:
470:
468:
465:
464:
460:
458:
455:
454:
450:
447:
446:
442:
441:
434:
429:
425:
421:
420:
414:
410:
406:
405:
399:
395:
391:
390:
384:
380:
377:
376:
368:
364:
361:
360:
354:
350:
347:
346:
338:
334:
331:
330:
324:
319:
318:
312:
307:
306:
300:
296:
293:
292:
286:
281:
280:
274:
269:
268:
262:
258:
257:EWHC Exch J61
255:
254:
248:
239:
234:
232:
227:
225:
220:
219:
216:
207:
198:
195:
193:
192:
187:
186:
179:
175:
171:
169:
168:Lord Hoffmann
165:
164:
156:
152:
150:
146:
145:
140:
139:
131:
122:
118:
114:
112:
108:
104:
100:
91:
89:
88:implied terms
85:
81:
78:
77:
68:
67:implied terms
63:
58:
54:
51:
47:
43:
39:
35:
29:
24:
19:
16:
512:
500:. Retrieved
496:the original
486:
461:
457:EWCA Civ 293
451:
443:
417:
402:
387:
371:
357:
342:
341:
327:
315:
308:2 All ER 293
303:
289:
277:
267:The Moorcock
265:
251:
206:government.
204:
201:Significance
196:
189:
183:
181:
176:
172:
161:
158:
154:
147:AC 108, 137
142:
136:
133:
128:
119:
115:
97:
75:
74:
73:
15:
424:2014 SCC 71
149:Lord Wright
55:, 1 AC 408
527:Categories
478:References
394:97 ER 1162
160:setting":
502:2 January
49:Citations
448:1 AC 294
320:1 AC 294
210:See also
125:Judgment
60:Keywords
467:UKPC 10
422:,
392:(1766)
107:annuity
80:UKHL 39
53:UKHL 39
282:AC 701
82:is an
407:
94:Facts
41:Court
504:2010
529::
90:.
506:.
237:e
230:t
223:v
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
