Hayat v Pensions Regulator [2025] UKFTT 42 (GRC) (07 January 2025)

Hayat v Pensions Regulator [2025] UKFTT 42 (GRC) (07 January 2025)

The appeal was struck out because the appellant failed to comply with a direction requiring provision of the decision under challenge, after being warned that non-compliance could result in striking out.

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2025] UKFTT 42 (GRC)
Parties
Appellant: Khadimullah Hayat; Respondent: The Pensions Regulator
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
07 January 2025
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Striking Out of Appeal at Preliminary Stage
Outcome
Appeal struck out
Legal Topics
Tribunal Procedure, Striking Out, Non Compliance With Directions
Pensions Regulatory Law Tribunal Procedure Striking Out Non Compliance With Directions

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Khadimullah Hayat

Appellant

The Pensions Regulator

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Striking Out of Appeal at Preliminary Stage

  1. 1 Whether the appeal should be struck out for failure to comply with tribunal directions

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was struck out because the appellant failed to comply with a direction requiring provision of the decision under challenge, after being warned that non-compliance could result in striking out.

Court Disposition

Appeal struck out

Orders

  • The appeal is struck out under Rule 8(3)(a) of the Rules.
  • The appellant may apply for reinstatement within 28 days under Rule 8(5) and (6).