(back to preceding text)

    79. As to the propriety of a clause 13(1)(e) determination of a sum to be paid by specified instalments, instead of the determination of a single lump sum, I can see nothing at all objectionable about it. The determination would necessarily have been made on the advice of the scheme actuary, who would be as well able to calculate the requisite sum to be paid by, say, five annual instalments as to calculate the requisite sum to be paid at once as a lump sum.

    80. And as to the determination of a "nil" amount to be paid in respect of an early leaver, provided the "nil" determination were accompanied by, and a consequence of, an appropriation directed under clause 14(5) of a suitable amount of surplus, I can see no reasonable objection to it. The appropriation would have had the consequence that nothing more was needed in order to cover the extra cost to the fund of the early retirement.

     81. I, too, would allow the appeals.