Baverstock Construction Ltd v The Pension Regulator

NCN: [2026] UKFTT 00019 (GRC) First-tier Tribunal (General Regulatory Chamber) Pensions Case Reference: FT/PEN/2025/0148 Decision given on: 07 January 2026 Before

TRIBUNAL JUDGE KIAI Between

BAVERSTOCK CONSTRUCTION LTD and

THE PENSION REGULATOR Appellant Respondent Decision: The proceedings are struck out under Rule 8(3)(a) and (b) of The Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal)(General Regulatory Chamber) Rules 2009.

REASONS 1. The Appellant lodged his appeal using the GRC1 form on 16 June 2025.

2. On 11 September 2025, the Appellant was provided with Case Management Directions. He was explicitly told that it was not clear he has a right of appeal to the Tribunal and “Attached to this email are Case Management Directions explaining what you must do next”.

3. On 16 September, Victor Lewis (on behalf of the Appellant), emailed the GRC and the Pensions Regulator, explaining that there had been a misunderstanding. He explained that there has only been one director and one company secretary for one day. The director was the only employee at the time the PAYE scheme opened in November 2023.

4. No other response was received from the Appellant or on his behalf. No explanation was provided for the failure to respond to the Case Management Directions. © CROWN COPYRIGHT 2024 5. On 4 November 2025 the Appellant was again directed to serve the Pensions Right to Appeal form and the completed GRC1 by 19 November. He was explicitly told that he was being given ‘one last opportunity’ and ‘failure to comply with the direction above could lead to the Tribunal striking out this appeal for failure to comply pursuant to Rule 8(3)(a) of the Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (General Regulatory Chamber) Rules 2009 without further direction’.

6. The Appellant again failed to respond to the Tribunal’s directions.

7. No further documents have been served on the Tribunal.

8. The Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (General Regulatory Chamber) Rules 2009 state: 8. (3) The Tribunal may strike out the whole or a part of the proceedings if— (a) the appellant has failed to comply with a direction which stated that failure by the appellant to comply with the direction could lead to the striking out of the proceedings or part of them; (b) the appellant has failed to co-operate with the Tribunal to such an extent that the Tribunal cannot deal with the proceedings fairly and justly; or (c) the Tribunal considers there is no reasonable prospect of the appellant's case, or part of it, succeeding.

9. I find that the test under Rule 8(3)(a) is met: the Appellant has failed to comply with a direction which stated that failure to comply could lead to the striking out of the proceedings (as set out in the directions of 11 September 2025 and 4 November 2025). The Appeal is struck out for this reason.

10. I further conclude that the test under Rule 8(3)(b) is met: the Appellant has failed to co- operate with the Tribunal (by failing to respond to the directions dated 11 September and 4 November 2025) to such an extent that the Tribunal cannot deal with the proceedings fairly or justly. The Appeal is also struck out for this reason.

11. The overriding objective in Rule 2 of the Procedure Rules requires the Tribunal to deal with cases fairly and justly. For completeness, I add that I find it is fair and just to strike out the proceedings. The Appellant has now had various opportunities to engage with the Tribunal about his case. He has not provided any explanation for the failure to do so. He has not provided any reason why the appeal should not be struck out. Signed Judge Kiai Date: 7th January 2026 2