![[2025] UKUT 00018 (LC)](https://backend.juristeca.com/files/emisores/logo_lnJS4Uj.png){kind=logo}
Grounds of appeal
Grounds of appeal
The FTT granted permission to appeal on seven grounds, but after the discontinuance of the appeal in relation to No.13 and a certain amount of simplification Miss Osler based her argument on four propositions which give rise to the following issues:
Whether, before the statutory presumption of an RPI increase can be displaced on the basis of a deterioration in the condition of a site or a decrease in amenity, the FTT must be satisfied that the whole of the site has deteriorated, not simply one aspect of it.
Whether a “transitory state of affairs” can amount to a relevant deterioration, or whether there must instead be a permanent deterioration which affects the fabric of the site itself.
Whether the FTT had sufficiently considered what a reasonable pitch fee should be, or had simply decided that the statutory presumption had been displaced and stopped there, without carrying out a valuation.
Whether the FTT had taken into account irrelevant matters which had not been put to the parties for comment during the hearing.
- Heading
- Introduction
- Pitch fee reviews under the 1983 Act
- The FTT’s decision
- Grounds of appeal
- Issue 1: Must a deterioration or decrease in amenity affect the whole or most of the site before the presumption of an RPI increase will be displaced?
- Issue 2: Must a decrease or deterioration be permanent to displace the presumption?
- Issue 3: Did the FTT ask itself the right question before deciding there should be no increase or only a restricted increase?
- Issue 4: Did the FTT take into account irrelevant considerations?
- Conclusions