Tribunal Lacks Jurisdiction Over Three-Year Fixed Term Tenancy
📌 In brief
The First-tier Tribunal decided it couldn't hear a case about a landlord's request to raise rent because the tenancy agreement was for a fixed term of three years. This means the case was dismissed based on the type of tenancy agreement.
⚖️ Legal holding
The tribunal does not have jurisdiction over fixed-term tenancies under the relevant tenancy legislation.
📖 What the law says
This section of the Housing Act 1988 applies to certain types of assured periodic tenancies, excluding relevant low-cost tenancies. It outlines the process for landlords to propose increases in rent through a notice in a prescribed form.
Plain-English explanation — does not replace advice from a solicitor.
📖 Technical summary
The case was struck out due to the tribunal lacking jurisdiction over a fixed-term tenancy.
📜 Headnote Official document
The First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) determined that it lacked jurisdiction to hear an application regarding a landlord's notice of rent increase for a fixed-term tenancy, citing Section 13 of the Housing Act 1988.
📚 Full judgment Official document
OUTCOME: Struck Out
FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY) Case Reference : LON/00BK/MNR/2022/0029 HMCTS Code (paper, video, audio) :
P: PAPERREMOTE
Property : [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE] Tenant : Mr. [APPELLANT] and Ms. [APPELLANT], in person Landlord : [NAME], represented by [COMPANY] of [NAME] : Section 13 Housing Act 1988 Tribunal Members : Mr. [NAME] of Decision : 4 May 2022
DECISION The Tribunal does not have jurisdiction to determine this [NAME] for the reasons stated below.
Covid-19 pandemic: description of hearing This has been a remote determination on the papers which has been consented to by the parties. The form of remote determination was P:PAPERREMOTE. A face-to-face hearing was not held because no-one requested the same and all issues could be determined on paper. The documents that the Tribunal were referred to are in a bundle of approximately 30 pages, the contents of which have been noted.
REASONS
The [NAME]
1. The Tribunal received an [NAME] from the Tenant, Mr [APPELLANT] and Ms [APPELLANT] dated 3 March 2022. The [NAME] was received by the Tribunal on 4 March 2022.
2. The [NAME] referred a Landlord’s Notice of Increase in relation to [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE] (the subject property). The Notice of Increase was dated 16 February 2022 and proposed to increase the rent of the subject property from £1546.18 per month to £1698.26 per month with effect from 1 April 2022. The Law
3. Section 13(1) of the Housing Act 1988 provides as follows: 13 (1) This section applies to— (a) a statutory periodic tenancy other than one which, by virtue of paragraph 11 or paragraph 12 in Part I of Schedule 1 to this Act, cannot for the time being an assured tenancy; and (b) any other periodic tenancy which is an assured tenancy, other than one in relation to which there is a provision, for the time being binding on the tenant, under which the rent for a particular period of the tenancy will or may be greater than the rent for an earlier period.
Facts Found 4. The terms of the tenancy agreement state “the term of the tenancy is three years beginning at midday on 23 December 2020 ...” Discussion and Reasons for the Decision 5. Section 13 confers jurisdiction of the tribunal only in respect of statutory periodic tenancies and other periodic tenancies which are assured tenancies.
6. The tribunal finds that the subject tenancy is a three-year fixed term tenancy. It therefore falls outside of the tribunal’s jurisdiction under section 13 (1) of the act.
Accordingly, the tribunal does not have jurisdiction to consider the [NAME].
7. By virtue of rule 9(1)(a) of The Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (Property Chamber) Rules 2013, where the tribunal lacks jurisdiction, it must strike out the case. Accordingly, the [NAME] is struck out.
Name: Mr. [NAME]: 4 May 2022
ANNEX - RIGHTS OF APPEAL
By rule 36(2) of the Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (Property Chamber) Rules 2013, the tribunal is required to notify the parties about any right of appeal they may have. If a party wishes to appeal this decision to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber), then a written [NAME] for permission must be made to the First-tier Tribunal at the regional office which has been dealing with the case.
The [NAME] for permission to appeal must arrive at the regional office within 28 days after the tribunal sends written reasons for the decision to the [NAME]. If the [NAME] is not made within the 28 day time limit, such [NAME] must include a request for an extension of time and the reason for not complying with the 28 day time limit; the tribunal will then look at such reason(s) and decide whether to allow the [NAME] for permission to appeal to proceed, despite not being within the time limit. The [NAME] for permission to appeal must identify the decision of the tribunal to which it relates (i.e. give the date, the property and the case number), state the grounds of appeal and state the result the party [NAME] the [NAME] is seeking. Any appeal in respect of the Housing Act 1988 should be on a point of law.
If the tribunal refuses to grant permission to appeal, a further [NAME] for permission may be made to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber).
📊 How courts decide similar cases
Among 12 similar decisions in this collection:
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Rejects Defective Notice of Rent Increase
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Rejects Appeal for Rent Increase During Fixed Term
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Rejects Tenant's Appeal for Rent Increase Determination
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Approves Rent Increase Due to Property Improvements
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tenant's Cost Order Request Rejected by First-tier Tribunal
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tenant Successfully Challenges Invalid Rent Increase Notice
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Allows Landlord to Skip Consultation for Urgent Damp Pr…
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Sets Fair Rent for Protected Periodic Tenancy
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Sets Fair Rent After Property Inspection
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Sets Market Rent for Assured Tenancy
A snapshot of this collection — not a prediction of your case's outcome.
❓ Frequently asked questions
What did this decision decide?
The tribunal decided it didn't have the power to hear the case because the tenancy agreement was for a fixed term of three years.
Who was involved?
The tenant and the landlord were involved.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided it lacked jurisdiction because the tenancy agreement was for a fixed term of three years, which falls outside its authority under Section 13 of the Housing Act 1988.
Which laws or rules were applied?
The Housing Act 1988, specifically Section 13.
What was the argument that mattered most?
The argument that mattered most was that the tenancy agreement was for a fixed term of three years, which meant the tribunal had no jurisdiction to hear the case.
Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?
The decision was against the person who brought the case.
What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?
Someone in a similar situation would need to check if their tenancy agreement is for a fixed term and understand that certain tribunals might not have jurisdiction to hear their case.
What evidence or documents mattered?
The tenancy agreement and the landlord's notice of rent increase were important documents.
Can a decision like this be appealed?
Decisions like this can sometimes be appealed to a higher tribunal, but the grounds for appeal must be based on a point of law.
Is it worth getting a solicitor for a case like this?
Yes, it is always recommended to seek advice from a qualified solicitor for cases involving tenancy agreements and rent increases.
