We also have a short informative video on this case!
Onigbanjo v Pearson 2008, provided all important clarity on Party Wall Notice responses and specifically an adjoining owner’s right to dissent to a Notice that they had previously consented to.
The case arose when an adjoining owner consented to a Party Wall Notice that was served upon them by the building owner.
The building owner commenced their works, following which the adjoining owner alerted them of property damage.
The property owners were unable to reach agreement on the damage and the adjoining owner informed the building owner that they intended to now dissent to the Party Wall Notice and have the damage determined by Party Wall Surveyors.
The building owner did not engage with the adjoining owner and as a result, the adjoining owner’s Party Wall Surveyor appointed a further Surveyor on behalf of the building owner under Section 10(4) of the Party Wall etc Act 1996.
A Party Wall Award followed and was agreed by both building owner’s and adjoining owner’s Party Wall Surveyors. This awarded the costs of damage to the adjoining owner.
Upon receipt of this Award, the building owner appealed via the court on the grounds that the original Notice consent, meant there wasn’t a dispute for the Act to resolve.
The judge heard the case and sided with the adjoining owner.
The outcome of this case cements that an adjoining owner’s Party Wall Notice consent can be converted to a dissent.
However, for this precedent to apply, there has to a dispute that the owners have been unable to resolve and therefore require the input of Surveyors appointed under Section 10 of the Act to resolve.
