Conclusions
Re-making the order
There is no question of any need to remit the matter to the FTT. We are asked to re-make the remediation order so as to exclude the Additional Items, and we will make an order in the form of the draft submitted by Mr Selby KC. He has asked us also to delete from the order the FTT’s requirement that MRL submit the order to the Building Safety Regulator; that order arose from the FTT’s view that the building is a higher risk building. Since the FTT had no jurisdiction to determine that the building fell into that category the requirement had no rational basis and we delete it.
Upper Tribunal Judge Elizabeth Cooke Mrs Diane Martin TD MRICSFAAV
28 May 2025
Corrected in paragraphs 9, 50, 64 and 67 under rule 53 of the Tribunal Procedure (Upper Tribunal) (Lands Chamber) Rules 2010
4 June 2025
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.
List of Respondents
MARIA ESCRIBANO (2)
HELENA LENDRUM AND MATTHEW RANKIN (3)
JAMES MICHAEL FORSTER (4)
SARA AND ALEXANDER GRADY (5)
KERRI ANNE PRITCHARD (6)
CLAIRE WAXLER AND TANJA LAUTENSCH LAEGER (7)
AMY AND JOHN ACKERLEY (8)
JUSTIS JUSTIN (9)
PAVIR AND CHERYL PATEL (10)
JONATHAN SMITH (11)
MICHAEL ELSDORFER AND SEYEDEHAMAGHAN FATEMI (12)
M A MOTTALIB (13)
HEIDI OLSEEN (14)
DHEARAEN QUICK (15)
EDOARDO PASCALE AND KATE PENWARDEN (16)
ROBYN YON (17)
ANNE MARIE MCLOUGHLIN (18)
ISABEL HARRIS (19)
WAYNE HOLLAND (20)
RICHARD PAYNE (21)
ROBERT PILKINTON (22)
ANDREW SIEPRATH AND KATE PEARSON (23)
AMAKA UKPABI (24)
ANDREI ZAMFIRACHE AND AMY SHIELDS (25)
MAGDALEN A KOZAK (26)
JO COLE (27)
CLARISSA CAPPELLETTI (28)
NICK WALTERS AND LOMA ROBERTSON (29)
- Heading
- Introduction
- The statutory background: the Building Safety Act 2022
- The factual background
- The MAF report and the application to the FTT
- The hearing on 27 March 2024
- The FTT’s decision and the remediation order
- The appeal
- The FTT’s raising of the Additional Items on its own initiative
- Decision contrary to the evidence
- Inappropriate use of the FTT’s expertise
- The matters were not put to MRL or its expert witnesses
- Additional Items not identified in the March order
- Conclusion on the grounds of appeal
- Consequences
- Conclusions
![[2025] UKUT 157 (LC)](https://backend.juristeca.com/files/emisores/logo_lnJS4Uj.png)