Conclusions
Conclusion
In conclusion, for the reasons I have given the appeal succeeds. The Tribunal substitutes its own decision for that of the FTT; in light of the FTT’s unappealed finding that the respondents were not prejudiced by the incomplete consultation the appellant is granted a dispensation from the section 20 consultation requirements in respect of the 2021 works and the later removal of asbestos; I have asked counsel to draft an order which specifies the extent of the work by reference to the material given to the FTT.
Upper Tribunal Judge Elizabeth Cooke
4 March 2024
Right of appeal
Any party has a right of appeal to the Court of Appeal on any point of law arising from this decision. The right of appeal may be exercised only with permission. An application for permission to appeal to the Court of Appeal must be sent or delivered to the Tribunal so that it is received within 1 month after the date on which this decision is sent to the parties (unless an application for costs is made within 14 days of the decision being sent to the parties, in which case an application for permission to appeal must be made within 1 month of the date on which the Tribunal’s decision on costs is sent to the parties). An application for permission to appeal must identify the decision of the Tribunal to which it relates, identify the alleged error or errors of law in the decision, and state the result the party making the application is seeking. If the Tribunal refuses permission to appeal a further application may then be made to the Court of Appeal for permission.
- Heading
- Introduction
- The legal background
- The factual background and the proceedings in the FTT
- The proceedings in the FTT
- The appeal
- (1): The FTT was wrong to hold that a landlord whose title has not been registered cannot enter and do works on the property without the legal owner’s permission
- 5(1) Did the appellant give a proper explanation of the extent and cost of the works?
- 5(2) Was there satisfactory evidence of completion of the works?
- 5(3) Was the FTT wrong to dismiss the report and schedule of works of Mr Payne?
- Conclusions
![[2024] UKUT 56 (LC)](https://backend.juristeca.com/files/emisores/logo_lnJS4Uj.png)