The courts’ power to review Lands Tribunal rulings has come under scrutiny in the Court of Appeal.
Three appeal judges forbade London landlord Sinclair Gardens Investments (Kensington) permission to seek judicial review of the tribunal’s refusal to hear an appeal over service charges levies.
The court backed a High Court decision that, although tribunal rulings may be subject to judicial review proceedings under section 3(4) of the Lands Tribunal Act 1949, the procedure should be used only in “exceptional circumstances”.
Sinclair had asked the tribunal for permission to challenge a leasehold valuation tribunal (LVT) decision disallowing a number of service charge costs levied against the company’s tenants between 1999 and 2002.
After the tribunal dismissed the application, Sinclair applied for judicial review on the ground that it had no alternative remedy since, as a refusal of permission to appeal did not constitute a “decision” under section 3(4), it was not able to challenge the refusal by a direct appeal.
However, the appeal judges ruled that the High Court had “rightly concluded” that permission to seek judicial review should be granted only in exceptional cases where jurisdictional errors or procedural irregularities amounted to a denial of the applicant’s right to a fair hearing.
Neuberger LJ held that, under section 3(4), it was “open” to a person who is refused permission by the tribunal to appeal an LVT decision to seek judicial review, but said that the right could be exercised only on narrow grounds.
He said that the LVT and the tribunal were both independent judicial bodies, with the additional advantage of specialising in service charge disputes, and that the general policy of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 was to leave residential service charge issues to their “good sense”.
“The point of law raised by Sinclair appears to me to involve what could accurately be characterised as a standard, or ‘bread and butter’, issue for an LVT,” he said.
“In those circumstances, it seems to me that this case is very far away indeed from being one of those exceptional cases where judicial review should be available.”
The LVT first heard the claim in 2002, when Manuela da Graca and Timothy O’Keefe, the lessees of two of Sinclair Gardens’ flats in Eardley Crescent, London SW5, challenged the company’s service charge expenditure.
R (on the application of Sinclair Gardens Investments (Kensington) Ltd v Lands Tribunal Court of Appeal (Auld, Laws and Neuberger LJJ) 8 November 2005.
Paul Letman (instructed by P Chevalier & Co, of Chessington) appeared for the appellant; Jonathan Karas (instructed by the Treasury Solicitor) appeared as an advocate to the court.
References: EGi Legal News 09/11/05
