University of the Arts London v Legal & General Pensions Limited & Anor.

University of the Arts London v Legal & General Pensions Limited & Anor.

The expert's determination on the construction issue was a 'decision' under the lease, and the 20 working day notice period for challenging it began upon its delivery. Time for serving notice under clause 28.8 was of the essence, as the lease expressly provided that the expert's decision would be final and binding unless notice was served within that period. UAL's failure to serve notice in time rendered the determination final and binding. There was no compelling reason to defer summary judgment to trial on this issue.

Parties
Claimant: University of the Arts London; First Defendant: Legal & General Pensions Limited; Second Defendant: Legal & General Assurance (Pensions Management) Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 September 2024
Procedural Posture
Civil (contract/property) / Summary Judgment/strike Out Application
Outcome
Summary judgment granted for Defendants on the binding nature of the expert determination; identified paragraphs of the Particulars of Claim to be struck out; rectification claim may proceed to trial.
Legal Topics
Interpretation of Leases, Finality of Expert Determination, Rectification of Contracts, Time of the Essence in Contractual Notices, Summary Judgment Procedure
Contract Law Property Law Landlord and Tenant Interpretation of Leases Finality of Expert Determination Rectification of Contracts Time of the Essence in Contractual Notices Summary Judgment Procedure

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 5 Authorities cited 22 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

University of the Arts London

Claimant

Legal & General Pensions Limited

First Defendant

Legal & General Assurance (Pensions Management) Limited

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil (contract/property) / Summary Judgment/strike Out Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the expert determination under the lease is final and binding given the timing of notice under the dispute clause
  2. 2 Whether time for serving notice under the lease dispute clause is of the essence
  3. 3 Whether there is a compelling reason for the matter to proceed to trial despite summary judgment application

Ratio Decidendi

The expert's determination on the construction issue was a 'decision' under the lease, and the 20 working day notice period for challenging it began upon its delivery. Time for serving notice under clause 28.8 was of the essence, as the lease expressly provided that the expert's decision would be final and binding unless notice was served within that period. UAL's failure to serve notice in time rendered the determination final and binding. There was no compelling reason to defer summary judgment to trial on this issue.

Court Disposition

Summary judgment granted for Defendants on the binding nature of the expert determination; identified paragraphs of the Particulars of Claim to be struck out; rectification claim may proceed to trial.

Orders

  • Identified paragraphs of the Particulars of Claim struck out as they relate to the construction issue already determined by the expert and now final and binding.
  • Parties to agree the precise form of order and address consequential matters within 28 days of judgment hand-down.