[2024] UKUT 11 (LC)

Mr Robling’s Notice of Appeal gave only his own name and was signed only by him, and the documents he enclosed related only to his own appeal. However in his covering letter to the Tribunal he stated that Mr Sprigg of 17 Meadow View was “the other appellant”. Following further correspondence it became clear that the second appellant, Mr Spriggs, has his caravan at 17, Meadow View, Pilgrim’s retreat; that he received the same pitch fee review notice as Mr Robling and likewise made an application to the FTT for a determination; and that he received a rule 9 notice and a decision dated 16 March 2022 striking out his application in the same words as those addressed to Mr Robling. The FTT then granted him permission to appeal in exactly the same terms as those on which it granted permission to Mr Robling.

Accordingly Mr Sprigg was added by the Tribunal as second appellant and has been represented by Mr Robling, and the appeal proceeded as an appeal from the two identical decisions. The two appeals raise exactly the same issue.