Kensington Avenue Limited v Nadia Curlin
[2024] UKUT 341 (LC)
Peabody Trust v Carole Welstead
19 February 2024
[2024] UKUT 41 (LC)
Upper Tribunal
A landlord appealed a lower court's decision to lower their rent. The appeal court ruled the lower court acted fairly, even though it didn't give precise details of how it determined the new rent. The lower court had the right to use its expertise and the landlord had failed to sufficiently explain its costs.
Key Facts
- •Peabody Trust appealed an FTT rent determination for Miss Welstead's assured tenancy.
- •The FTT reduced the fixed service charge, significantly impacting the total rent.
- •The appeal concerned procedural fairness in the FTT's handling of the service charge.
- •The FTT relied on its own general knowledge of market management charges.
- •Catalyst (original landlord) failed to adequately explain the service charge breakdown.
- •Miss Welstead referred the rent increase to the FTT due to dissatisfaction.
Legal Principles
A party is entitled to know the essentials of its opponent's case in advance for a fair trial.
Al Rawi v Security Service [2010] 3 WLR 1069
A tribunal must base its decision on evidence before it and not on unexposed evidence.
Arrowdell Ltd v Coniston Court (North) Hove Ltd [2006] EWLands LRA/72/2005
In rent determinations under s.14 Housing Act 1988, the FTT is not limited to resolving disputes but must determine the market rent considering the statutory assumptions. The tenant doesn't need to disprove the landlord's proposed increase.
Housing Act 1988, sections 13, 14
Expert tribunals can use their expertise but must disclose specific matters relied upon, allowing parties to comment. General experience and knowledge can be used without prior notice.
Zermalt Holdings SA v Nu-Life Upholstery Repairs Ltd [1985] 2 E.G.L.R. 14
Landlords are not entitled to add a new charge for a service already provided without a prior separate charge in the original service charge schedule. Costs incurred from the commencement of the tenancy without a corresponding charge are considered to be included in the rent.
Middleton v Karbon Homes Ltd [2023] UKUT 206 (LC)
Outcomes
Appeal dismissed.
The FTT's decision, while relying on its own expertise regarding market management charges, was not procedurally unfair. Catalyst had sufficient notice of the issues concerning the service charge, and the FTT’s reliance on general knowledge was permissible.