Penman v Upavon Enterprises Ltd [2001] EWCA Civ 956 (13 June 2001)

Penman v Upavon Enterprises Ltd [2001] EWCA Civ 956 (13 June 2001)

The court has no jurisdiction to make a vesting order under section 24 of the 1993 Act unless all terms of acquisition have either been agreed or determined by the leasehold valuation tribunal; a tribunal's decision is not 'final' for vesting order purposes if it leaves any term undetermined.

Citation
[2001] EWCA Civ 956
Parties
Appellant/claimant: David Brown Penman; Respondent/defendant: Upavon Enterprises Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
13 June 2001
Procedural Posture
Appeal (civil) / Appeal From High Wycombe County Court Decision on Vesting Order Under Leasehold Reform Housing and Urban Development Act 1993
Outcome
Appeal dismissed, with variation
Legal Topics
Collective Enfranchisement, Vesting Orders, Leasehold Reform Housing and Urban Development Act 1993, Leasehold Valuation Tribunal Jurisdiction, Time Limits for Applications
Property Law Landlord and Tenant Law Collective Enfranchisement Vesting Orders Leasehold Reform Housing and Urban Development Act 1993 Leasehold Valuation Tribunal Jurisdiction Time Limits for Applications

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

David Brown Penman

Appellant/claimant

Upavon Enterprises Limited

Respondent/defendant

Procedural Posture

Appeal (civil) / Appeal From High Wycombe County Court Decision on Vesting Order Under Leasehold Reform Housing and Urban Development Act 1993

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the court had jurisdiction to make a vesting order when not all terms of acquisition had been determined by the leasehold valuation tribunal
  2. 2 Whether the tribunal's partial decision was 'final' for the purposes of triggering the vesting order process
  3. 3 Whether the respondent was estopped from raising further issues not determined by the tribunal

Ratio Decidendi

The court has no jurisdiction to make a vesting order under section 24 of the 1993 Act unless all terms of acquisition have either been agreed or determined by the leasehold valuation tribunal; a tribunal's decision is not 'final' for vesting order purposes if it leaves any term undetermined.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed, with variation

Orders

  • Appellant's application to the County Court to be resurrected and stayed pending tribunal determination of outstanding issue
  • Respondent awarded costs of £6,000 inclusive of VAT