![[2025] UKUT 39 (LC)](https://backend.juristeca.com/files/emisores/logo_lnJS4Uj.png){kind=logo}
Vertical division – the issues
Vertical division – the issues
The requirement of vertical division gives rise to a number of distinct grounds of appeal and cross appeal in both proceedings.
It is convenient to identify the issues of principle and to consider the facts of the individual appeals as illustrations of points of general application. The issues are all related to the question whether to satisfy the requirement of section 72(3)(a) it is necessary for there to be a physical division through the building, “from the earth to the sky”, as Mr Bates put it, and what any such division must comprise. This gives rise to the following sub issues:
Is it necessary to consider each face of the building, or is the test of vertical division concerned only with the connection between the premises and the rest of the building?
If the focus is only on the area where the premises abut the remainder of the building, does it matter if part of the premises overhangs airspace above the rest of the building?
Does it matter if a notional line dividing the premises from its neighbour intersects with a solid building component, such as a basement slab or foundation?
Is it necessary that the division of the premises from the rest of the building be a perfectly straight line passing laterally from the front of the building to the back?
Can the premises constitute a “vertical division of the building” if part of the premises is undivided from the remainder of the building?
Other issues may arise in the Plaza Boulevard appeal, depending on how these issues of principle are resolved. They include: the extent to which a deviation from the requirement of a vertical division can be regarded as de minimis and of no consequence; the significance of the movement joint in the basement slab beneath The Studio; and the consequences of treating the outer face of the steel frame as the limit of the premises, leaving the cladding affixed to the steel frame on the wrong side of the boundary line.