Party Wall etc Act 1996 – Respondents serving notice on appellants under Act in respect of proposed works – Surveyors’ award made – Whether whole award vitiated by difference between works specified in notice and those authorised by award – Appeal dismissed
The respondents proposed to carry out a development on their land and served a notice on the appellants, the owners of adjoining property, under the Party Wall etc Act 1996. This resulted in a surveyors’ award under the Act including an award of compensation to the appellants.
The appellants appealed against the award on various grounds. Their primary ground was that the award was vitiated by the fact that the works that it authorised were not the same as those specified in the notice; the appellants contended that the award was therefore plainly wrong and it was necessary to start again.
Held: The appeal was dismissed.
The award was not plainly wrong. Section 10(10) of the 1996 Act was sufficiently wide to include a decision in the award on all matters that the surveyors felt it had to address. The court had to bear in mind the context, in which an award was, by its very nature, determined not by one person but by a surveyor acting for each side. It was unnecessary for the respondents to serve a new notice. The appellants’ other grounds of challenge had no merit.
Gabrielle Higgins (instructed by Ashfords LLP, of Exeter) appeared for the appellants; Robert Sheridan (instructed by Foot Anstey Solicitors, of Exeter) appeared for the respondents.
Sally Dobson, barrister
