The Mayor and Burgesses of the London Borough of Newham v Mr H Hannan, Mrs A Nessa & Others
Decision date: 7 October 2011
Neutral citation: [2011] UKUT 406 (LC)
Overall AI summary confidence: high
Short overview
This short overview is intended to summarise the case, issues and outcome so far as they are supported by the judgment.
AI confidence in this short overview: high
This appeal concerned whether the Local Valuation Tribunal (LVT) erred in refusing to dispense with a statutory consultation requirement where the council had published a notice in the Official Journal before serving a Notice of Intention on tenants. The Upper Tribunal held the LVT did err by failing to assess whether tenants suffered significant prejudice from the breach and, on the facts, found the breach caused no prejudice and granted dispensation limited to works already executed. The decision leaves unaffected re-consultation and non-recovery of costs for the remaining blocks.
Ratio decidendi
This summary is intended to identify the ratio decidendi, meaning the legal reasons for deciding and the binding part of the decision.
AI confidence in this ratio decidendi summary: high
Tribunals exercising the s.20ZA discretion must consider whether the procedural breach caused significant prejudice to tenants; significant prejudice is the principal consideration when deciding retrospective dispensation. The public notice requirement in paragraph 1(2)(d) aims to allow tenants to inspect the OJ advert and, where realistically possible, encourage compliant contractors to respond, but that opportunity may be very limited.
Obiter dicta
This summary is intended to identify obiter dicta, meaning observations made by the way that were not necessary to deciding the case and are not binding.
AI confidence in this obiter dicta summary: medium
The tribunal observed that the practical opportunity for tenants to influence procurement via OJ publication is narrow and often theoretical. It also suggested applicants should consider confining dispensatory relief to works already carried out where only some properties are affected, and that tribunals may require further enquiries about scope before deciding dispensation.