Brendan,
An interesting question. I am not sure that there is a simple answer.
1. If the the fund is a Personal Pension (self employed) it cannot be accessed until age 60 at the earliest. If one was declared bankrupt, it is possible that a Court could force the individual to access the funds from age 60, but I have never heard of such a case.
2. If the fund is an occupational pension then technically it is "owned" by the Trustees until the member retires (could be from age 50).
My understanding in the Murtagh case is that the basis for the decision has not been published. Did Mr. Murtagh agree to the Court order?
So the issue could have two legs:
- could a Court force an individual to retire and access the funds?
- when the individual does decide to access the funds, could the Court determine how the funds are used (whether an ARF or Annuity)?
Clearly ( as appears to be the case with the Murtagh ARF) if the individual is getting a lump sum (25% of the Fund perhaps) and has a residual lump sum that could be invested into an ARF, the Court might seek to access these funds. But would an amount of €119,800 still have to be invested into an AMRF?
However could the individual instead buy an annuity ( a guaranteed income for life)?
From a creditors viewpoint, the lump sum would be attractive, whereas trying to access a monthly pension would not seem as attractive. From that perspective, if the individual was in control of the pension funds, then the annuity will suit them better.
Until the Murtagh judgement is published ( and perhaps some more cases come to Court) it is unclear how such cases might pan out. I am not aware of any other such case, but perhaps other posters may have more to add.