[2023] UKUT 271 (LC)

I now come back to the Section 20C Applications and the question of whether I can and should deal with them, including the question of whether the Section 20C Applications have any impact upon my reasoning in relation to the issues in the appeal. It will be recalled that the Section 20C Applications have been made by certain of the Respondents, in January or February 2023.

It was not initially clear to me whether the Section 20 Applications had been made to the FTT or to this Tribunal. Subsequent inquiries have confirmed that the Section 20C Applications have been made to the FTT.

Mr Allison submitted that I could and should deal with the Section 20C Applications, which he characterised as misconceived, given that they postdate both the Original Decision and the Reviewed Decision.

I have come to the conclusion that I should not deal with the Section 20C Applications. It seems to me that the FTT should deal with the Section 20C Applications. The Section 20C Applications are not before me in this appeal. Beyond this, I have already noted that the Respondents did not attend the appeal hearing. That was a matter for the decision of the Respondents, so far as the issues in the appeal were concerned, and was not a matter, as I have explained, which prevented my hearing the appeal in the absence of the Respondents. In relation to the Section 20C Applications it seems to me that the position is not the same. I assume that the Respondents would not have been expecting me to deal with the Section 20C Applications in the appeal, given that they were made to the FTT. If I was to deal with the Section 20C Applications it seems to me that I would run the risk of committing a similar procedural error to that which I have identified in the decision of the FTT to impose the Costs Condition.

I do not see that the Section 20C Applications can or should have any impact on my reasoning in relation to the issues in the appeal. The position seems to me to be the other way round. As I understand the position, nothing has been decided in relation to the Section 20C Applications. If and to the extent that the FTT may decide that they should entertain the Section 20C Applications, they will need to be considered in the light of this decision and my reasoning in this decision.

In these circumstances I leave the Section 20C Applications for argument in the FTT, including any argument from the Appellant that the FTT should not entertain the Section 20C Applications at all.