In a hearing at the Chancery Division of the High Court, which is expected to last until Friday 19 June, Dalriada Trustees, the newly appointed trustee of eight of the schemes - which comprise at least 191 members in all - is seeking a ruling from the court as to whether they are all validly registered as occupational pension schemes.
Pi Consulting (Trustee Services) Ltd is seeking a similar ruling in respect of a ninth scheme.
According to written submissions advanced on behalf of the Pensions Regulator - which argues that none of the schemes are OPSs - the urgent question has arisen following the arrest on 8 May of a number of people central to the running of seven of the schemes.
While not strictly in dispute, the parties in the case have agreed to put the case for and against the schemes being OPSs in order to aid the judge in reaching a decision.
The judge is expected to give a ruling in writing at a later date after the hearing.
In written arguments before the court, Andrew Spink QC, representing Dalriada, said that the dispute arose from the question whether TPR had the authority to appoint Dalriada as trustee of its schemes in May.
But he said that, if the judge rules that they are not OPSs, this will mean that the Pension Regulator will not have direct jurisdiction over them and there “may well be serious tax consequences”.
All eight of the Dalriada schemes were established between 10 December 2012 and 30 January 2013, but both the Pensions Regulator and the City of London Police believe that the schemes have been used for “pensions liberation” - the general term used to describe attempts to release funds from HMRC registered pension schemes prior to retirement, and in a manner not authorised under the Finance Act 2004.
Mr Spink said the term ‘pensions liberation’ does not in and of itself imply illegality and that it is entirely possible to “liberate” assets held under an HMRC registered pension scheme without any illegality.
