Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 02 SEPTEMBER 2025

Upper Tribunal Increases Sum Specified In Contribution Notice

Addleshaw Goddard
Addleshaw Goddard
Contributor
Addleshaw Goddard

Addleshaw Goddard

Addleshaw Goddard is a global law firm trusted by over 3,000 major organisations, including 51 FTSE...

View firm profile
Explore more from Addleshaw Goddard

In the case of Pelgrave v The Pensions Regulator, the Upper Tribunal has increased the liability imposed on an individual by a contribution notice (CN) under the Regulator's "moral hazard" powers.

United KingdomEmployment and HR

In the case of Pelgrave v The Pensions Regulator, the Upper Tribunal had to consider the case of an individual who had been made the subject of a contribution notice under the Regulator's "moral hazard" powers. The Regulator has the power to issue a contribution notice requiring a person to pay a specified amount to a pension scheme where that person has been party to an act or failure to act that has detrimentally affected the likelihood of accrued benefits being received. We consider the wider implications of the judgment.

In the case of Pelgrave v The Pensions Regulator, the Upper Tribunal has increased the liability imposed on an individual by a contribution notice (CN) under the Regulator's "moral hazard" powers. The Regulator may issue a CN imposing liability on a person who is a party to an act or failure to act which the Regulator considers has detrimentally affected in a material way the likelihood of accrued scheme benefits being received.

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

See more popular content from