[2025] UKUT 151 (LC)

In his grounds of appeal Mr Szymczak asserted that the tenancy agreement with Menna Elwakeil was produced by the landlord’s representative during the hearing, and that he was not given a copy during the hearing and therefore could not comment on it. When it was sent to him later he discovered that the meta-data indicated that it was created on the day of the hearing. He took the view that it had been forged by the landlord.

With his grounds of appeal Mr Szymczak supplied copies of the assured shorthold tenancy agreements for Scarlett Kennedy and for Daniela Coates, which he said he had been unable to obtain before the FTT hearing; the agreements indicated that each was required to live at the property as her only or principal residence. Each agreement was for a period of 12 months, and Ms Coates’ agreement ran from July 2022.

Mr Szymczak was granted permission to appeal in the following terms:

“1.

If the documents which the applicant now has access to and wishes to rely on in support of the appeal can be taken into account, there is a realistic prospect of him persuading the Tribunal to accept that the FTT reached the wrong conclusion on the periods of occupancy and whether those who had rights of occupation were in occupation of the property as their main residence. Those documents appear to show, in particular, that Daniela Coates was granted a tenancy earlier than the respondent suggested and that Scarlett Kennedy was granted an assured shorthold tenancy requiring her to reside in the property as her only or main residence.

2.

Whether the applicant should be entitled to rely on the new material which was not provided to the FTT remains to be decided and will be considered at the start of the appeal hearing. The applicant may rely on the statement he has submitted explaining the attempts he made to obtain the documents before the hearing and the respondent may make submissions opposing the applicant’s application to be allowed to rely on it.”