Decision

Decision on Ten Technologies Group Ltd

Published 17 April 2026

Order under the Companies Act 2006

In the matter of application No. 5648

For a change of company name of registration No. 16781289

Decision

The company name TEN TECHNOLOGIES GROUP LTD has been registered since 13 October 2025 under number 16781289.

By an application filed on 24 October 2025, TEN LIFESTYLE GROUP PLC applied for a change of name of this registration under the provisions of section 69(1) of the Companies Act 2006 (the Act).

A copy of this application was sent to the primary respondent’s registered office on 26 November 2025, in accordance with rule 3(2) of the Company Names Adjudicator Rules 2008. The copy of the application was sent by Royal Mail UK “Tracked 48 With Signature” service. On 26 November 2025, the Tribunal wrote to Duncan McDonald to inform them that the applicant had requested that they be joined to the proceedings. No comments were received from Duncan McDonald in relation to this request. On 27 December 2025, Duncan McDonald contacted the Tribunal by email to advise that he had contacted the applicant on 3 November 2025 in an attempt to resolve the matter and was awaiting a reply. On 22 January 2026, the Tribunal responded by email and confirmed that it noted the content of Duncan McDonald’s communication and advising that the respondent had until 26 January 2026 in which to file a defence should it wish to do so. On 26 January 2026, in response, Duncan McDonald contacted the Tribunal by email to advise that he would not be filing a defence and had attempted to contact the applicant on 3 November 2025 in an attempt to resolve the matter and was awaiting a reply .

On 11 February 2026, the Tribunal wrote to the respondent as follows:

“I acknowledge receipt of your email dated 26 January 2026, which has been seen by an adjudicator. Please note that you must copy any correspondence to the tribunal to the applicant’s representatives at the same time.

The role of the Company Names Tribunal is to adjudicate disputes. Whilst the respondent may be attempting to find an amicable solution to the matter, any such negotiations are separate from the tribunal proceedings. Unless proceedings are stayed, which would have to be a request made jointly by both parties, the tribunal’s procedures and deadlines remain in effect.

The primary respondent was given a deadline to file a defence (which must be accompanied by a form CNA2) but has chosen not to do so. Consequently, the application will be treated as undefended and an order made that the company name be changed unless you request a hearing on the appropriate fee-bearing form.

As regards costs, it is noted that “notice” claimed on the amended form CNA1 is after the date on which these proceedings were launched. In these circumstances, the tribunal would not normally award costs against the respondents if the application remains undefended.… As stated above, the official letter dated 26 November 2025 informed you that if you wished to defend your company name you should file a form CNA2 on or before 26 January 2026. This is in accordance with rules 3(3) and(4) of the Company Names Adjudicator Rules 2008. As no CNA2 has been filed within the time period set,in accordance with Rule 3(4) the adjudicator may treat the application as not being opposed and may make an order under section 73(1) of the Companies Act 2006.

However,in accordance with rule 5(3) either party has the right to be heard. The request must be made on form CNA4. A fee of £100 must accompany form CNA4. A period of 14 days from the date of this letter is provided for either party to make a request for a hearing; so any request must be made on or before 25 February 2026. If no hearing is requested within this term the adjudicator will consider making an order.”

On the same date, Duncan McDonald was joined as a co-respondent and the applicant was also advised that no defence had been received to the application and so the adjudicator may treat the application as not being opposed. The parties were granted a period of 14 days to request a hearing in relation to this matter, if they so wished. No request for a hearing was made.

The primary respondent did not file a defence within the two month period specified by the adjudicator under rule 3(3). Rule 3(4) states:

The primary respondent, before the end of that period, shall file a counter-statement on the appropriate form, otherwise the adjudicator may treat it as not opposing the application and may make an order under section 73(1).

Under the provisions of this rule, the adjudicator may exercise discretion so as to treat the respondent as opposing the application. In this case I can see no reason to exercise such discretion and, therefore, decline to do so.

As the primary respondent has not responded to the allegations made, it is treated as not opposing the application. Therefore, in accordance with section 73(1) of the Act I make the following order:

(a) TEN TECHNOLOGIES GROUP LTD shall change its name within one month of the date of this order to one that is not an offending name

(b) TEN TECHNOLOGIES GROUP LTD and Duncan McDonald each shall:

(i) take such steps as are within their power to make, or facilitate the making, of that change;

(ii) not cause or permit any steps to be taken calculated to result in another company being registered with a name that is an offending name.

An “offending name” means a name that, by reason of its similarity to the name associated with the applicant in which he claims goodwill, would be likely to be the subject of a direction under section 67 (power of Secretary of State to direct change of name), or to give rise to a further application under section 69.

In accordance with s.73(3) of the Act, this order may be enforced in the same way as an order of the High Court or, in Scotland, the Court of Session.

In any event, if no such change is made within one month of the date of this order, I will determine a new company name as per section 73(4) of the Act and will give notice of that change under section 73(5) of the Act.

All respondents, including individual co-respondents, have a legal duty under Section 73(1)(b)(ii) of the Companies Act 2006 not to cause or permit any steps to be taken calculated to result in another company being registered with an offending name; this includes the current company. Non-compliance may result in an action being brought for contempt of court and may result in a custodial sentence.

TEN LIFESTYLE GROUP PLC, having been successful, would normally be entitled to a contribution towards its costs. However, the applicant has confirmed that it did not contact the respondent prior to making its application. In accordance with 10.4.1 of the Company Names Tribunal: Practice Direction 2014, an award of costs will not be made in this case.

Any notice of appeal against this decision to order a change of name must be given within one month of the date of this order. Appeal is to the High Court in England, Wales and Northern Ireland and to the Court of Session in Scotland.

The company adjudicator must be advised if an appeal is lodged, so that implementation of the order is suspended.

Dated 16 April 2026

Susan Eaves
Company Names Adjudicator