Bar set high to prevent disclosure of prohibited pension trustee’s name pending tribunal reference (Salih v The Pensions Regulator)

Table of contents

• What are the practical implications of this case?
• What was the background?
• What did the Upper Tribunal decide?
• The Suspension Application
• The Privacy Applications
• Case details

Article summary

Pensions analysis: The Upper Tribunal requires cogent evidence that the disclosure of a prohibited trustee’s name is significantly likely to damage or destroy their livelihood before it will direct the Pensions Regulator or itself not to disclose that name pending a reference by the prohibited trustee of the Pensions Regulator’s prohibition order to the Upper Tribunal, according to the Upper Tribunal in Salih v The Pensions Regulator. Moreover, the Upper Tribunal has no power to suspend the effect of a decision by the Pensions Regulator to prohibit a person from acting as trustee.