Bill 12 repeals the Pension Plan Sustainability and Transfer Act (chapter 42, 2023) and the related New Brunswick Regulation 2024-3. The text removes the statutory framework that created a Sustainable Pension Plan Authority and rules for transferring prescribed pension plans.
Rather than leaving a legal vacuum, the bill includes transitional provisions: it revokes the Authority’s appointment, deems a specific Superintendent order (and related Board/Tribunal/arbitration decisions) to be in force, and grants broad immunity to the Crown, the Minister, the Authority, prescribed parties and administrators for acts or omissions tied to the repealed law. Those protections extend to acts from December 13, 2023 through the date the repeal comes into force and bar claims that would arise from the repeal itself.
At a Glance
What It Does
The bill repeals the 2023 Act and its 2024 regulation, revokes the appointment of the Sustainable Pension Plan Authority, deems certain existing orders and dispute decisions to remain in force, and grants immunity to named public and private actors for conduct tied to the repealed law.
Who It Affects
Pension plan administrators and trustees, the Minister of Finance and Treasury Board and the Superintendent of Pensions, employers and bargaining agents in prescribed transferring plans (notably the nursing homes plan identified in the bill), the Labour and Employment Board and the Energy and Utilities Board, and any arbitrators who decided disputes under the prior framework.
Why It Matters
The repeal removes the province’s statutory mechanism for pension-plan transfers and sustainability while simultaneously locking in legal protection for a narrow set of orders and actors. That combination creates immediate legal certainty for some stakeholders and potential gaps or unanswered questions for others.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
Bill 12 is short on new policy and focused on unwinding the province’s 2023 experiment with a statutory transfer-and-sustainability regime for certain pension plans. At its simplest, it strikes the Pension Plan Sustainability and Transfer Act from the statute book and repeals the single regulation made under that Act.
The bill does not recreate a replacement framework; instead it relies on transitional language to manage the consequences of repeal.
To operate those transitional clauses, the bill supplies a set of definitions that carry meaning for sections 3–6. Those definitions borrow terminology — administrator, authority, transferring plan, receiving plan, parties, Superintendent, Tribunal — so the transitional rules can refer to actors and plans even though the underlying Act and regulation are gone.
That choice narrows legal ambiguity about who the transitional protections cover, but it also ties interpretation back to terms that originally depended on the repealed regulation.The bill revokes the Authority’s appointment and includes an express bar on any action against the Crown or the Minister arising from that revocation. Separately, it declares that a specific regulatory and adjudicative record—the Superintendent’s order dated January 30, 2023, imposing terms on the Pension Plan for General and Service Employees of New Brunswick Nursing Homes (registered NB.0447938), together with any related Tribunal/Board orders and arbitrator or arbitration-board decisions—remains in force.
That deeming clause is narrow in scope: it preserves existing determinations rather than reinstating the full statutory regime.Finally, the bill grants broad immunity. It prevents lawsuits against the Crown, the Minister, the Authority, the prescribed parties and administrators (and their advisors) for acts or omissions done in good faith under the repealed Act from December 13, 2023 until the repeal’s commencement.
It also bars actions arising out of the repeal itself. In practice, those protections aim to extinguish litigation risk tied to the period the repealed Act was in force and to limit fresh claims triggered by removing the statutory framework.
The Five Things You Need to Know
The bill repeals the Pension Plan Sustainability and Transfer Act (chapter 42 of the Acts of New Brunswick, 2023) and New Brunswick Regulation 2024-3 made under it.
It expressly revokes the appointment of the Sustainable Pension Plan Authority and precludes actions against the Crown or the Minister arising from that revocation.
It deems the Superintendent’s January 30, 2023 order regarding the Pension Plan for General and Service Employees of New Brunswick Nursing Homes (registered NB.0447938), any Tribunal or Board orders related to that Superintendent order, and any arbitrator or arbitration-board decisions about that transferring plan to be in force.
It provides immunity from suit for the Crown, the Minister, the Authority, prescribed parties, and administrators (and their agents/advisors) for acts or omissions done in good faith under the repealed Act from December 13, 2023 through the repeal’s commencement and also bars actions resulting from the repeal itself.
Sections 3–6 include transitional definitions (administrator, authority, parties, transferring/receiving plan, Superintendent, Tribunal) so the repeal’s protective measures can be applied to named actors and decisions despite the underlying statute and regulation being removed.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Repeal of the Pension Plan Sustainability and Transfer Act
Section 1 removes the entire 2023 statute from the statute book. Practically, that eliminates the legislative authority for plan-transfer rules, the Sustainable Pension Plan Authority’s statutory mandate, and any procedures the Act created. Stakeholders can no longer rely on the Act’s provisions as a source of statutory power or obligation after the repeal comes into force.
Repeal of Regulation 2024-3
Section 2 repeals New Brunswick Regulation 2024-3, which likely contained the operative definitions and the list of transferring plans the Act would have governed. Repealing the regulation removes the administrative detail that implemented the Act, which is why the bill supplies its own transitional definitions: without them the transitional clauses would lack referents.
Transitional definitions
Section 3 inserts definitions to make sections 4–6 workable after repeal. By defining 'administrator', 'authority', 'parties', 'transferring plan', 'receiving plan', 'Superintendent', 'Tribunal' and 'Board', the bill ensures the transitional protections attach to specific actors and proceedings. The definitions pull some office-holders (for example, the Superintendent under the Financial and Consumer Services Commission Act) into the transitional scheme even though the original statutory context has been removed.
Revocation of the Authority appointment and protection for the Crown
Section 4 revokes the appointment of the person named to serve as the Sustainable Pension Plan Authority and includes an explicit prohibition on instituting actions against the Crown or the Minister as a result of that revocation. The clause does two things: it effectually terminates the Authority’s statutory role and immunizes the government from litigation that could follow the termination.
Deeming certain orders and decisions to be in force
Section 5 preserves the legal effect of a narrowly identified set of measures: the Superintendent’s January 30, 2023 order for the NB nursing homes pension plan (NB.0447938), any orders by the Labour and Employment Board or the Energy and Utilities Board relating to that Superintendent order, and arbitration awards or arbitration-board decisions made under collective agreements or other acts. This is a targeted continuity measure—it keeps those specific determinations operative even though the enabling statute has been repealed.
Broad immunity for acts and omissions under the repealed Act
Section 6 bars suits against listed entities—the Crown, the Minister, the Authority, the parties and their advisors, and administrators and their advisors—both for conduct in good faith performed under the repealed Act from December 13, 2023 to commencement and for claims that would otherwise arise from the Act’s repeal. This is a prophylactic protection designed to close off retrospective and prospective litigation tied to the short-lived statutory regime.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on this topic across all five countries.
Explore this topic in Codify Search →Who Benefits and Who Bears the Cost
Every bill creates winners and losers. Here's who stands to gain and who bears the cost.
Who Benefits
- The Crown/Provincial government — reduces potential litigation exposure by barring actions tied to the Authority’s revocation, acts under the repealed Act, and claims caused by the repeal.
- Administrators, trustees and their advisors for covered transferring plans — gain immunity for good-faith conduct during the period the repealed Act was in force, lowering personal and professional liability risk.
- Participants and beneficiaries of the Nursing Homes pension plan (NB.0447938) — receive legal continuity because the Superintendent’s order and related Tribunal/Board/arbitration decisions are expressly preserved.
- Arbitrators and arbitration boards involved in disputes about the covered transferring plan — their awards are protected and remain enforceable under the deeming clause, reducing uncertainty about enforcement.
- The Superintendent/Financial and Consumer Services Commission — retains a defined role in the transition by having orders and roles referenced and preserved in the transitional language.
Who Bears the Cost
- Members of other transferring or receiving plans not singled out in the deeming clause — lose the statutory transfer mechanism and may face uncertainty about the future governance or funding of their plans.
- Potential plaintiffs with grievances tied to the repealed Act — face a legal bar to suits for good-faith acts or for harms alleged to flow from the repeal, which may foreclose remedies.
- Sustainable Pension Plan Authority staff or appointees — lose the statutory role and any authority-based functions when the appointment is revoked.
- Regulatory and administrative bodies (FSCC/Superintendent, Labour and Employment Board, Tribunal) — may inherit operational and interpretive burdens to manage unresolved issues without the repealed statutory tools.
- Employers and bargaining agents outside the preserved determinations — must navigate a new landscape without the transfer framework, potentially increasing negotiation or litigation costs where the statute had provided a procedure.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The bill confronts a classic trade-off: prioritize legal finality and to limit government and actor liability, or preserve broad access to remedies and a statutory mechanism for restructuring pensions. It achieves the former by repealing the Act and granting immunity while only partially protecting select orders—an approach that secures certainty for some at the cost of leaving others with unresolved legal and operational uncertainty.
The bill trades a short-lived statutory framework for a narrow package of legal protections and continuity measures. That has pragmatic advantages—chiefly, it reduces litigation risk and keeps one contested regulatory order intact—but it also creates gaps.
Repealing the Act and its regulation removes an explicit statutory route for transferring pension obligations; unless other statutes or contractual arrangements fill that role, parties may face uncertainty about how to restructure plans, allocate liabilities, or enforce ongoing obligations.
The immunity and deeming clauses are legally blunt instruments. The good-faith immunity covers acts and omissions between a specified start date and the repeal’s commencement, which caps liability but may also extinguish meritorious claims where administrative decision-making caused loss.
The deeming provision protects a particular Superintendent order and related decisions, but it does not address remaining or future disputes about other plans, nor does it clarify how assets and liabilities must be administered going forward. Finally, because several transitional terms rely on the repealed regulation for their original meaning, courts or regulators may face interpretive questions when applying the definitions in new contexts.
There's more to this law than the bill.
Codify Laws traces every connection across the legislative lifecycle.