header-logo header-logo

Tribunals—Upper tribunal—Procedure

24 February 2011
Issue: 7454 / Categories: Case law , Law reports
printer mail-detail

Pensions Regulator v Michel Van de Wiele NV [2011] All ER (D) 138 (Feb)

Upper Tribunal (Tax and Chancery Chamber), Warren J (P),
17 Jan 2011

The Upper Tribunal is not bound by the normal constraints of a review or appeal when considering a matter referred from the Pensions Regulator. It is able to take account of evidence not available to the regulator or presented to the determination panel.

Robert Ham QC and Edward Sawyer (instructed by Ward Hadaway) for VDW. Raquel Agnello QC and Thomas Robinson (instructed by the Pensions Regulator) for the regulator.

The underlying proceedings concerned whether or not a company and its director was attempting to minimise or avoid contributions to a pension fund. The determination panel (the panel), established by the Pensions Regulator (the regulator) pursuant to the Pensions Act 2004, held a hearing following which it issued a contribution notice saying that the company was liable, but that the director was not.

The company referred the matter to the Upper Tribunal (Tax and Chancery Chamber) (the tribunal). Issues arose as to the

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Firm expands London disputes practice with senior partner hire

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Senior associate promotion strengthens real estate offering

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Leading patent litigator joins intellectual property team

NEWS
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
back-to-top-scroll