The High Court has dismissed a tenant’s appeal on points of law against a Residential Tenancies Board determination that a termination notice was valid because the landlords required the dwelling for their daughter’s occupation.
Mr Justice Garrett Simons delivered judgment on 20 November 2023. The appeal concerned a Tenancy Tribunal determination order dated 17 August 2022. The court’s role was limited: it could not rehear the dispute or overturn factual findings unless, among other narrow grounds, they lacked evidence or no reasonable decision-maker could have made them.
The tenant argued that he had been served with a photocopy rather than the original statutory declaration accompanying the notice. The Tribunal had heard evidence from the tenant and one of the landlords, George Dyer, and preferred Dyer’s account that the original documents had been served. The court acknowledged a discrepancy: the affidavit of service referred to a “True copy Statutory Declaration”. It held that the Tribunal’s assessment of the evidence and its resolution of that discrepancy were reasonably open to it. The High Court therefore did not decide whether service of an original declaration is legally required; it said that question did not arise on the Tribunal’s finding that the original was served.
The tenant also challenged the interval between the Tribunal’s determination and the written determination order. The court said the legislation did not set a minimum waiting period before the order was issued. The 21-day period applies to bringing a High Court appeal after the order issues. The tenant’s appeal was made within that period, and no claim was made that it was late.
Other arguments were rejected as outside the proper scope of the appeal or without merit. The tenant’s claim that the landlords’ real purpose was commercial disposal or reletting at higher rent had not been raised before the Tribunal. Dyer had testified that the dwelling was needed for their daughter, who was participating in a local farming course; that evidence had not been challenged in cross-examination. The court also rejected a late query about the remote Tribunal panel’s attendance and said the European Convention arguments added nothing to the complaints already addressed.
The court dismissed the appeal under section 123 of the Residential Tenancies Act 2004, leaving the determination order in place. It gave a provisional view that the RTB was entitled to its legal costs, but made no order on the notice parties’ costs. Any party seeking a different costs order was directed to contact the Registrar within seven days to arrange a hearing on 4 December 2023.