James Naylor reports on why jurisdiction trumps good intentions in Leasehold Valuation Tribunals
What fetters are placed upon the LVT’s jurisdiction when the court transfers a discrete issue to it? Can it go beyond the transferred issue and determine other issues in dispute? These were the questions before the Upper Tribunal in John Lennon v Ground Rents (Regisport) Limited [2011] UKUT 330 (LC).
The matter started life as a standard service charge insurance premium dispute in the Lambeth County Court. At trial, the District Judge transferred proceedings: “To the Leasehold Valuation Tribunal…for determination of the reasonableness of [the] sum charged for insurance.” The LVT proceedings reached dénouement with a finding on the tasked insurance premium issue. However, the LVT didn’t stop there: in fact, it went on to decide other issues over and above the question of reasonableness of insurance charges. This was no accident or mistake. As the judgment makes clear, it was a calculated decision: “It is noted that the Order states that the transfer was ‘for determination of the reasonableness of sum charged for insurance’ but the Tribunal has jurisdiction
