As detailed in an article by Nick Thornton of BenefitsPro, in February 2020, the Supreme Court ruled unanimously against the fiduciaries of two Intel Corp. defined contribution plans.
At issue before the court in Intel Corp. Investment Policy Committee v. Sulyma was a statute of limitation provision under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act. The High Court upheld a decision in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, ruling that a plan participant needs “actual knowledge” of a fiduciary breach to trigger a three-year statute of limitation to file suit against a plan sponsor.
The decision also settles a circuit split on ERISA’s actual knowledge provision. Many expect it will have real ramifications for plan sponsors going forward. “Receipt of a document does not give a participant actual knowledge of what’s in it,” said Kevin Walsh, a partner with The Groom Law Group. “Before this case, it was unclear if you needed to get confirmation that a participant has read a document, or if sending a notice was sufficient. The Supreme Court has said it is not,” added Walsh.
Plan Sponsors May More Quickly Adopt Electronic Disclosures
The ruling also comes in front of a new rule on electronic documents and disclosure. The DOL expects to issue such rules in 2020. “I think the decision creates another big push towards electronic disclosure,” said Walsh. “In a paper world, it’s impossible for a sponsor to confirm everyone has read the mail they’ve been sent.” In reaction to the decision, more sponsors can be expected to include check-the-box disclosures confirming participants’ understanding of plan documents, thinks Walsh.
Alito’s brief concedes that the decision may “substantially” diminish ERISA’s protections for fiduciaries. He also said ruling in favor of Intel would reduce ERISA’s protections for participants. “Choosing between these alternatives is a task for Congress, and we must assume that the language of (ERISA) reflects Congress’s choice,” wrote Alito. In other words, if plan sponsors do not like that participants must have “actual knowledge” of a fiduciary breach, they will need Congress to act to fix it.
This website uses cookies to improve your experience. We'll assume you're ok with this, but you can opt-out if you wish. Cookie settingsACCEPT
Privacy & Cookies Policy
Privacy Overview
This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Out of these cookies, the cookies that are categorized as necessary are stored on your browser as they are essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website. We also use third-party cookies that help us analyze and understand how you use this website. These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies. But opting out of some of these cookies may have an effect on your browsing experience.
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. This category only includes cookies that ensures basic functionalities and security features of the website. These cookies do not store any personal information.
Any cookies that may not be particularly necessary for the website to function and is used specifically to collect user personal data via analytics, ads, other embedded contents are termed as non-necessary cookies. It is mandatory to procure user consent prior to running these cookies on your website.