The Pensions Regulator v Payae Ltd & Ors [2018] EWHC 36 (Ch) (23 January 2018)

The Pensions Regulator v Payae Ltd & Ors [2018] EWHC 36 (Ch) (23 January 2018)

The court found that the fourth to seventh defendants were knowingly concerned in the misuse and misappropriation of assets of occupational pension schemes, that the schemes were valid occupational pension schemes, and that dishonesty is not a necessary ingredient for liability under s.16 Pensions Act 2004. The...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2018] EWHC 36 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: The Pensions Regulator; Defendant: Payae Limited; Defendant: Estrella Confero Limited; Defendant: Friendly Pensions Limited; Defendant: David Austin; Defendant: Susan Dalton; Defendant: Alan Barratt; Defendant: Julian Hanson; Defendant: Dalriada Trustees Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
23 January 2018
Procedural Posture
Civil Pension Regulatory Claim / High Court Trial Final Judgment
Outcome
Claim allowed against the fourth to seventh defendants; orders for restoration of misappropriated assets to the pension schemes.
Legal Topics
Misuse of Pension Assets, Misappropriation of Trust Property, Accessory Liability, Dishonesty in Civil Proceedings, Restitution, Trustee Duties, Pension Liberation Fraud
Pensions Law Trusts Law Insolvency Law Misuse of Pension Assets Misappropriation of Trust Property Accessory Liability Dishonesty in Civil Proceedings Restitution +2 more

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 11
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Pensions Regulator

Claimant

Payae Limited

Defendant

Estrella Confero Limited

Defendant

Friendly Pensions Limited

Defendant

David Austin

Defendant

Susan Dalton

Defendant

Alan Barratt

Defendant

Julian Hanson

Defendant

Dalriada Trustees Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Pension Regulatory Claim / High Court Trial Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether assets of occupational pension schemes were misused or misappropriated
  2. 2 Whether defendants were knowingly concerned in such misuse or misappropriation
  3. 3 Whether dishonesty is a necessary ingredient under s.16 Pensions Act 2004

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the fourth to seventh defendants were knowingly concerned in the misuse and misappropriation of assets of occupational pension schemes, that the schemes were valid occupational pension schemes, and that dishonesty is not a necessary ingredient for liability under s.16 Pensions Act 2004. The defendants are liable to restore the misappropriated assets to the schemes.

Court Disposition

Claim allowed against the fourth to seventh defendants; orders for restoration of misappropriated assets to the pension schemes.

Orders

  • The fourth to seventh defendants are ordered to restore to the Receiving Schemes, acting by the eighth defendant, the sums misappropriated or misused as set out in the judgment.
  • Specific sums to be paid by each defendant as detailed in the judgment.