Ruby Triangle Properties Ltd v Jesus Sanctuary Ministries Ltd
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judge | Master Teverson |
| Judgment Date | 17 August 2020 |
| Neutral Citation | [2020] EWHC 2247 (Ch) |
| Docket Number | Case No: PT-2019-000947 |
| Date | 17 August 2020 |
| Court | Chancery Division |
[2020] EWHC 2247 (Ch)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE
BUSINESS AND PROPERTY COURTS OF ENGLAND AND WALES
PROPERTY TRUSTS AND PROBATE LIST (Ch)
The Rolls Building
7 Rolls Buildings
Fetter Lane
London EC4 1NL
Master Teverson
Case No: PT-2019-000947
Case No: PT-2019-001024
James Hanham (instructed by Eversheds Sutherland (International) LLP) for Ruby Triangle Properties Limited in both claims
Angus R Gloag (instructed on a Direct Access Basis) for Jesus Sanctuary Ministries Limited in both claims
Hearing dates: 8, 9 and 10 June 2020
Approved Judgment
I direct that pursuant to CPR PD 39A para 6.1 no official shorthand note shall be taken of this Judgment and that copies of this version as handed down may be treated as authentic.
Claims PT-2019-001024 and PT-2019-000947 were listed before me for a 3 day trial commencing on 8 June 2020. Jesus Sanctuary Ministries Limited (“JSM”) is the Claimant in PT-2019-001024 and the Defendant in PT-2019-000947. Ruby Triangle Properties Limited (“RTP”) is the Defendant in claim PT-2019-001024 and the Claimant in PT-2019-000947. There is a counterclaim by RTPL in claim PT-2019-001024.
RTP is a special purpose vehicle company which since 25 March 2019 has been registered as the proprietor of an area known as Ruby Triangle located off the Old Kent Road in London. Planning permission was granted for a major development of the area on 6 June 2019.
JSM is a church and mission organisation. It has an evangelical focus. The majority of its church members are from Black and Ethnic Minority backgrounds. It has since 2009 occupied and used as a worship centre part of a building known as Property 11 that is located within the Ruby Triangle development area. Its pastor is Pastor Uzor Ndekwu.
On 24 October 2019, RTP, by its agents, took possession of the parts of Property 11 occupied by JSM without a court order. On 25 October 2019, JSML was granted in the County Court at Central London a without notice interim injunction ordering RTP to restore it to possession. Possession was restored to JSM at around 8pm in the evening of 25 October 2019 after the police had been in attendance for a number of hours.
On the return date, on 6 November 2019, JSM was permitted to remain in possession on terms that, without prejudice to its contention that it was in occupation as a tenant, it pay £68.50 per day in respect of its use and occupation, weekly in arrears. The claim by then issued by JSM in the county court was ordered to be transferred to the High Court in the Property, Trusts and Probate List of the Business and Property Courts of England and Wales. It was allocated claim number PT-2019-0010249 on transfer in. In this claim, JSM seeks a declaration that it is a tenant of the premises and as such enjoys the protection of Part II of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954. It claims damages for unlawful eviction including exemplary and aggravated damages. It further claims that sums totalling £70,670.25 were unlawfully taken by RTP's agents from its offices at the time of the unlawful eviction.
On 18 November 2019, RTP issued claim PT-2019-000947 having on 31 October 2019, without prejudice to its position that JSM was in occupation as a licensee, served on JSM a section 25 notice and notice to quit by 2 May 2020. RTP, without prejudice to its position that JSM's occupation was under a permissive licence that had been validly terminated prior to 24 October 2019, applied under section 29(2) of the 1954 Act for an order for the termination of any tenancy held by JSM and protected by Part II of the 1954 Act relying on grounds (a), (b) and (f) of section 30(1) of Part II of the 1954 Act.
At the outset of the trial, it became apparent that it would not be possible without the risk of unfairness to both sides to try the issues raised in claim PT-2019-000947. On 4 June 2020, I handed down my judgment on two applications heard on 27 May 2020 in that claim: an application for judgment in default of defence by RTP and a cross-application by JSM permitting the late filing by it of a defence. I declined to enter a default judgment and gave permission to JSM to rely on its defence notwithstanding its lateness. In my judgment, at paragraph 26, I referred to the possible need to look at the planning history and planning documents to see whether any obligations were imposed on RTP to relocate existing occupants. Mr Hanham, counsel for RTP, very properly drew to my attention that disclosure had not been made by his client of the section 106 agreement entered into alongside the grant of planning permission and that there were additional planning documents not before the court. In those circumstances, after hearing both counsel, I directed that the issues under Part II of the 1954 Act be excluded from the ambit of the trial. Those issues are scheduled to be determined at a second trial commencing on 19 August 2020.
JSM has been in occupation of accommodation on the ground floor of Property 11 under the terms of an agreement in writing headed “Church Hire/Rental Agreement made on 3 May 2009 between (1) World Harvest Christian Centre as “the Owner” and (2) Jesus Sanctuary Ministries as “the Licensee”. The period of time of the agreement was from 3 May 2009 to 30 June 2012. The agreement Fee was £25,000 per annum, exclusive of water rates, heating, lighting and cleaning, payable in advance upon signing the document and by yearly advance payments. The agreement gave the Licensee exclusive possession of any part of the premises comprising (1) Auditorium, (2) Two Offices, (3) One Kitchen, (4) Male & Female Lavatories, (5) One Disabled Lavatory, (6) One Reception, and (7) a set designated car park for Jesus Sanctuary GO.
JSM remained in occupation after the expiry of the agreement term. In October 2015, World Harvest Christian Centre (“WHCC”), sold its interest in the whole building to OKR Regeneration Limited (“OKR”). Notification of the sale was not however given to JSM until 12 January 2017. JSM continued to deal with WHCC over issues relating to the state of the building including water leakage in particular.
On 12 January 2017, Hart Brown Solicitors acting on behalf of OKR enclosed a letter dated 28 October 2015 from Wellers Solicitors on behalf of WHCC to JSM giving notification of the sale to OKR. It was confirmed to Pastor Ndekwu by Pastor Seyi for and on behalf of WHCC that WHCC had sold its interest in 25–27 Ruby Street to OKR as part of planned regeneration of Ruby Street and its surrounding area. At a meeting with Pastor Ndekwu attended by Reverend Babatunde and Pastor Seyi on behalf of WHCC, the rationale behind the sale was explained. Rev Babatunde apologised at the meeting that notification of the transfer was not given to JSM in 2015. It was said there had been an error on the part of the new owners' Solicitors.
WHCC remained in occupation of its part of 25 to 27 Ruby Street. It told JSM it had agreed with the new owners to vacate six months following the approval of the new owners' planning permission. WHCC said JSM's tenancy had been transferred over to the new owners. WHCC said any issues relating to repairs should be taken up with the new owner. It said however that on its part, and in good faith, it would resolve the ongoing water leakage issue.
By letter dated 25 March 2019, Hart Brown Solicitors notified JSM that OKR had transferred its interest in the land at West Ruby Street to RTP. In the period between 12 January 2017 and 25 March 2019, JSM had fallen into dispute with Mr Thomas William Pratt, a director of OKR. JSM took particular objection to scaffolding erected at the front of the building without a licence in July 2018. JSM issued proceedings against OKR in the County Court at Lambeth seeking the removal of the scaffolding. Those proceedings were stayed for mediation. According to Pastor Ndekwu, Mr Pratt refused to engage in that process and the scaffolding remained in place. The scaffolding does not block access to the premises. It has in the view of Pastor Ndekwu prevented the membership of the church from expanding.
By letter dated 25 March 2019, Eversheds Sutherland (International) LLP (“Eversheds”) acting on behalf of RTP notified JSM that any rent arrears in respect of 25–27 Ruby Street had been assigned by OKR to RTP by a Deed of Assignment of Rent Arrears dated 15 March 2019. The letter referred to RTP as “your landlord”.
On 17 April 2019, at the request of Pastor Ndekwu, Eversheds sent a copy of the Deed of Assignment of Rent Arrears to JSM.
On Saturday 13 July 2019, an eviction notice was affixed to a wall at the entrance of the premises. It referred to the premises “you are currently illegally occupying”. It said: “You must move from the property by the following date: 25 July 2019”. The notice in the top left corner referred to “Avanton”. It gave an address but no contact details. In the top right hand corner, the notice referred to “Security Risks Specialists” below a logo. JSM's case is that at that time it had no idea of whom Avanton was.
SRS Security put Andrew Chukwuenweniwe, an officer of JSM, in touch with Luka Kelman of Avanton Limited (“Avanton”). Avanton acts as a site development manager in respect of the Ruby Triangle site and other sites in the portfolio of the group. Andrew Chukwuenweniwe registered JSM's serious displeasure at the eviction notice. Luka Kelman said in response on 19 July 2019, the reason...
To continue reading
Request your trial