D Harrison (UK) Ltd v The Pensions Regulator

NCN: [2025] UKFTT 00788 (GRC) Decision given on: 30 June Case No. In the First-tier Tribunal (General Regulatory Chamber) Pensions Before: Judge Appellant: Respondent(s): Case Management Directions (The Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (General Regulatory Chamber) Rules 2009) It is ordered:- 1. The Appeal is struck out. REASONS 1. This Tribunal only has the power to consider appeals against Penalty Notices issued by the Pensions Regulator where: (a) A review of the Penalty Notice has been conducted by the Pensions Regulator; or (b) The Appellant made an application to the Pensions Regulator for the Penalty Notice to be reviewed, within 28 days from the date on which it was issued, the Pensions Regulator actually posted the Penalty Notice, and the Appellant received the Penalty Notice. 2. As it was not clear from the Notice of Appeal that these conditions applied, a senior legal officer directed that the Appellant provide a copy of the decision they seek to challenge by 7 October 2024. The Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (General Regulatory Chamber) Rules 2009 can be found online at https://www.gov.uk/courts-tribunals/first-tier-tribunal-general-regulatory- chamber 3. On 7 October 2024, the Appellant provided a copy letter from the Pensions Regulator but not the Penalty Notices that were the subject of the appeal. Judge Buckley therefore made an order confirming that the Appellant must provide those notices by 29 November 2024. 4. On 25 November 2024, the Appellant provided copies of a Fixed Penalty Notice dated 25 October 2022 and Escalating Penalty Notice dated 24 November 2022. 5. On 27 November 2024, the Appellant provided a copy email from the Pensions Regulator confirming that the Regulator did not carry out a review because the Appellant did not request a review within the 28 day deadline and the matter was outside the 18 months within which the Regulator can carry out a review on their own initiative. 6. On 6 May 2025, Registrar Bamawo confirmed that the Tribunal only has jurisdiction if there was an in-time request for a review or a Pensions Regulator’s review and invited the Appellant to make representations as to why the matter should not be struck out for want of jurisdiction. 7. On 20 May 2025, the Appellant wrote to the Tribunal commenting that the penalties stem from a communication issue with their old accountant and asserting that the Appellant was compliant with their obligations to make pension contributions. That email did not address the issue of whether the Tribunal has jurisdiction to hear this appeal. The email attached the Appellant’s request to the Pensions Regulator for a review dated 13 August 2024, which is of course substantially outside the 28 day time limit. 8. Under Rule 8(3)(c), the Tribunal may strike out a case where the Tribunal considers there is no reasonable prospect of the Appellant's case, or part of it, succeeding. There is no reasonable prospect of the Appellant’s case succeeding if the Tribunal does not have jurisdiction. The Appellant has been given opportunity to make representations as to why the case has been struck out. Those representations do not address the issue of jurisdiction. All of the documentation provided by the Appellant identifies that the Tribunal does not have the power to deal with this matter. Signed: Judge Date: 26 June 2025 3