The Superintendent of Financial Services proposed an order requiring Dustbane Enterprises Limited to fund a deficit arising from the partial wind-up of its pension plan.
Dustbane argued that the plan was a multi-employer pension plan and that its distributors were separate employers liable for their respective shares of the deficit.
The Financial Services Tribunal held that the plan did not meet the statutory requirements for a multi-employer pension plan, as there were no written participation agreements and the plan was not administered as such.
The Tribunal directed the Superintendent to carry out the proposed order, making Dustbane solely liable for the deficit.