On 19 January 2024, the First Tier Tribunal (the FTT) handed down its first remediation contribution order under section 124 of the Building Safety Act 2022 (the BSA).
In Triathlon Homes LLP v (1) Stratford Village Development Partnership (SVDP) (2) Get Living plc (3) East Village Management Limited (EVML)  UK FTT 26 (PC) the FTT had to decide whether it was just and equitable to make remediation contribution orders against a developer pursuant to section 124(1) of the BSA. The FTT’s power is discretionary and is to be exercised having regard to the purpose of the BSA and all relevant factors as it does in other contexts, notably with regard to costs protection under section 20C of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 and paragraph 5A(2) of Schedule 11 of the Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act.
The FTT considered the respondents’ arguments alongside the intention of Parliament when creating the BSA in order to reach its conclusions. This article sets out the key points from Triathlon in relation to the intention of Parliament, the interpretation of the BSA and how the FTT may consider future applications of this type, including the factors that it did and did not place weight on in reaching its decision.
Other key points to note
The FTT held that public funding is a matter of last resort and should not be seen as a primary source of funding where other parties, within the scope of section 124, are available as sources of funding.
A remediation contribution order can be made in relation to costs incurred before the date of commencement of the BSA on 28 June 2022. The legislation permits this result, although, there might be a factor or factors which render it unjust and inequitable to make a remediation contribution order in respect of costs incurred prior to 28 June 2022.
Finally, drawing together all of the above points, the FTT concluded that it was just and equitable to make the remediation contribution orders sought by Triathlon.