If you think you don’t need to worry about the Building Safety Act 2022 because you do not consult in relation to, develop or manage tall buildings or buildings with dwellings in them, you might need think again.
The Building Safety Regulator has conducted an initial review of the definition of a “higher-risk building”, and has suggested that height alone might not be an appropriate yardstick. Plans for an ongoing review will (it is said) be set out in summer 2025, though there is no sign of it yet. Given the government’s legislative agenda, it may be later than that, but it will come.
That said, the Act does not only affect tall buildings or buildings with dwelling is them in any event. A Building Liability Order under s.130 of the Building Safety Act 2022 can be made in respect of any liability under the Defective Premises Act 1972 Act, or section 36 of the Building Safety Act 1980 (not yet in force), or in relation to any defect that causes a “building safety risk”. Other than claims under the 1972 Act, none of those claims are restricted the type of tenant (residential or commercial) or by whether the building is a “relevant building” or a “high risk building” under the 2022 Act, so any corporate body that has been involved in developing a building, or that is associated with such a company (even one loss ago dissolved), can be the target of a claim for works carried out up to 30 years ago. The recent Supreme Court judgment in URS Corporation Ltd v BDW Trading Ltd (2025) has made it clear that these changes are very far reaching indeed.
The Court of Appeal has also just handed down its decisions in the case of Triathlon Homes LLP v Stratford Village Development Partnership [2025] EWCA Civ [2025] EWCA Civ 846 (“Triathlon”) and in Adriatic Land 5 Limited v Long Leaseholders of Hippersley Point [2025] EWCA Civ 856 (“Hippersley Point”). The judgments for the most part confirm the decisions of the FTT and Upper Tribunal that they sought to appeal, concerning the retrospective effect of the leaseholder protections against remediation costs being passed on to them in Schedule 8 of the Act, and the retrospective effect of Remediation Contribution Orders against companies associated with the landlord, and when it might be “just and equitable” to make such an order.
Very strident statements have again been made about the broad applicability of the regime imposed by the Building Safety Act, and how nice legal arguments will not succeed in thwarting its evident purpose.
If you have any questions regarding the Building Safety Act 2022, please contact Sam Cook.
