{"id":10756,"date":"2026-10-30T12:14:15","date_gmt":"2026-10-30T12:14:15","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/rfblegal.co.uk\/?post_type=insight&p=10756"},"modified":"2026-11-10T10:02:03","modified_gmt":"2026-11-10T10:02:03","slug":"ronald-fletcher-baker-secures-further-permission-in-major-court-of-appeal-building-safety-dispute","status":"publish","type":"insight","link":"https:\/\/rfblegal.co.uk\/it\/approfondimenti\/ronald-fletcher-baker-secures-further-permission-in-major-court-of-appeal-building-safety-dispute\/","title":{"rendered":"Ronald Fletcher Baker Secures Further Permission In Major Court of Appeal Building Safety Dispute"},"content":{"rendered":"

Ronald Fletcher Baker LLP has secured further permission to appeal on behalf of its client, London Property Company Limited, in Essendi UK Hotels 2 Limited v London Property Company Limited<\/a>, a significant commercial property dispute concerning building safety obligations and the interpretation of commercial leases.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In an order dated 5 October 2026, Lord Justice Fraser granted permission to appeal on two additional grounds relating to the Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005<\/a>. The decision follows the earlier grant of permission by the High Court on six grounds, meaning that the Court of Appeal will now consider eight grounds raising important questions of law affecting commercial landlords and tenants.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The proceedings concern the Ibis London Wembley hotel and responsibility for the removal and replacement of external cladding. Following a trial in the Technology and Construction Court, London Property Company Limited is challenging a judgment requiring it to undertake the remediation works. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The appeal raises questions extending well beyond the circumstances of this particular building. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Court of Appeal will consider whether a landlord’s obligation to keep a building in “good condition” extends to remedying inherent defects in its design or construction where there has been no physical deterioration or disrepair. It will also examine whether general lease covenants relating to compliance with legal obligations permit a tenant to pursue a private contractual claim for alleged breaches of statutory fire safety duties. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Further grounds concern the interpretation of “dangerous substances” under the Fire Safety Order and whether cladding forming an integral part of a building falls within those provisions. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The two additional grounds granted permission by Lord Justice Fraser address the proper approach to proportionality when assessing fire safety precautions and the scope of the duty owed to relevant persons, particularly where premises have been closed. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

In granting permission, Lord Justice Fraser recognised the wider significance of these questions, observing that appellate guidance on the scope of duties under the Fire Safety Order “would be of great assistance in the industry”, particularly given the number of buildings affected by similar cladding issues. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The RFB team<\/strong>\u00a0<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

The litigation is being conducted by RFB’s specialist property litigation team, led by Partners Rudi Ramdarshan<\/a> e Victoria Huxley<\/a>, working closely with Senior Associate Nii-Amaa Ollennu<\/a>. The team has acted in the proceedings through the High Court trial and the subsequent appeal, working alongside Nicholas Trompeter KC<\/a> di Selborne Chambers<\/a> e Emma Hynes<\/a> di Gatehouse Chambers<\/a>.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Commenting on the appeal, Rudi Ramdarshan said:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n

“The issues raised by this case are of considerable importance to commercial property owners and occupiers. Following Grenfell, the responsibilities associated with building safety have understandably attracted intense scrutiny, but important questions remain about how those obligations operate under existing commercial leases and the statutory framework.”<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

Victoria Huxley added:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n

“The Court of Appeal now has an opportunity to provide authoritative guidance on the extent of those obligations and the allocation of responsibility for potentially very substantial remediation costs. These are issues with significant practical and financial consequences for landlords and tenants across the commercial property sector. We are pleased to have secured permission for our client to advance these important questions before the Court of Appeal.”<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

The case reflects Ronald Fletcher Baker’s experience in conducting complex commercial property disputes, particularly those involving the interaction between contractual obligations, statutory regulation and substantial financial exposure. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The appeal will now proceed before the Court of Appeal. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Should you have any questions please contact Rudi Ramdarshan<\/a>, Victoria Huxley<\/a> o Nii-Amaa Ollennu<\/a>. <\/p>","protected":false},"author":23,"featured_media":6493,"parent":0,"menu_order":0,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"om_disable_all_campaigns":false,"_uf_show_specific_survey":0,"_uf_disable_surveys":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[20],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-10756","insight","type-insight","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-property-litigation"],"acf":[],"aioseo_notices":[],"aioseo_head":"\n\t\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t