Wednesday 11 October 2023
Appeal 1 – By Appellant’s Notice filed on 24 November 2022, Global Guardians Management Ltd, Global 100 Ltd and Theo Kyprianou appeal the decision of Fancourt J dated 26 September 2022 sitting in the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber).
Background – The decision of the First Tier Tribunal involved a determination of two primary questions of mixed fact and law, so far as relevant to this appeal: (1) whether the Property was an HMO within the meaning of the 2004 Act because the occupation of the rooms licensed to the Second to Eleventh Respondents and others as their only or main residences was “the only use of that accommodation”, within the meaning of s.254(2)(d) of the 2004 Act; (2) whether the First Appellant (“GGM”) and Global 100 were each a “person having control” of and a “person managing” the Property, as defined in s.263 of the 2004 Act, and according had correctly been served with penalty notice.
Appeal 2 – By Appellant’s Notice filed on 26 April 2022, Global 100 Ltd appeal the decision of Martin Roger KC dated 25 February 2022 sitting in the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber).
Background – The issue in this appeal is whether a former office building occupied by “property guardians” was a house in multiple occupation (HMO), applying the standard test in section 254(2), Housing Act 2004. The First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) (the FTT) held that the building was an HMO, and that it should have been licensed under Part 2, 2004 Act. Because it was not licensed the conduct of the appellant, which the FTT found was the person managing the building, amounted to an offence to which the rent repayment regime in Chapter 4 of Part 2, Housing and Planning Act 2016 applied. On the application of three former guardians, who are now respondents to this appeal, the FTT imposed rent repayment orders on the appellant requiring it to repay £6,251.85 which it had received in rent from the respondents between June and December 2020.