In Smithson & Ors v Hamilton [2008] EWCA Civ 996, the Court of Appeal has approved a compromise between the parties. The outcome of the appeal had been expected to provide clarification of the extent to which the courts will permit parties to use methods other than rectification to correct mistakes in scheme documents. However, the compromise obviated the need to reconsider the issues heard at first instance (which had generated great interest amongst practitioners). For further information about the lower court's decision, which indicated that the courts would adopt a strict approach in cases where rectification was the "obvious" remedy but was not sought, see Legal update, High Court rejects rectification by the back door and Legal update, Pension scheme rules: don't brush mistakes under the carpet.

The brief judgment in the Court of Appeal is still of interest. In particular, the court addressed concerns about the use of the representative procedure under CPR 19.7 to bind members who might be unaware of the compromise, by ordering that the trustees of the scheme in question must write to affected members before the compromise becomes binding.