The First-tier Tribunal has ordered five respondents, led by developer Urban Splash Limited, to pay £46,500,650 towards remediation of seven Manchester high-rise buildings, in a decision handed down on Thursday.
The tribunal made remediation contribution orders (RCOs) against Urban Splash Limited (R1), Urban Splash Developments Limited (R2), Urban Splash Group Holdings Limited (R3), Urban Splash Work Limited (R4) and a fifth respondent, R11, at [7]. Most of the sum is payable to the Secretary of State, it said at [8].
No RCOs were made against TBI 2000 Limited (R5), TM Freeholds Limited (R6), SURE Residential A Limited (R7) or SURE Residential LLP (R10) [9].
The buildings were developed by Urban Splash Limited between about 2000 and 2008 [3]. The Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government made seven applications under the Building Safety Act 2022 on 22 March 2024 [35].
The tribunal found that £60,638,548, inclusive of VAT, was reasonably incurred or is to be incurred on remediation [12]. The RCOs total less than that figure after a 10% reduction and other adjustments explained in Part 6 of the decision [26].
The tribunal said some adjustment was justified in light of Government failures [24]. It added that the 10% reduction is not a finding that Government was responsible for part of the failure [25].
On the fire-safety evidence, the tribunal said it preferred the Secretary of State’s [27].
Under section 124(1) of the 2022 Act, the tribunal may make an RCO on the application of an interested person if it considers it just and equitable to do so.
Under section 124(3), a body corporate may be required to pay only if it falls within listed categories, including a developer in relation to the building or a person associated with one.
The decision holds that falling within a category is not enough. An entity does not become liable merely because it is a developer or is legally connected to the building [13]. The tribunal applied that test to each respondent.
It considered it appropriate to make RCOs against R1 [14]. It reached the same conclusion for R2, R3 and R4 [16]. R11 was established after the buildings had been completed [17].
The position of R5 and R6 was “materially different” [19]. R7 and R10 form part of a regulated investment fund investing in completed UK residential property [20]. The tribunal also found that R10 is not associated with R1 [21].
The tribunal had earlier dealt with a similar application in London. In the Empire Square case, decided on 5 June 2025, an order against The Berkeley Group Holdings plc required payment of £9,687,500 for remediation by 3 July 2025, with that payment suspended on conditions.
A mediated settlement was agreed between parties to the proceedings before the final hearing [37].
The hearing was held at Manchester Civil Justice Centre. It ran from 27 April to 15 May and from 8 June to 1 July, with a gap of about three weeks between the two phases, and the tribunal sat for seven weeks in total [51], [52].
The panel was Judge J Holbrook, Regional Judge N Walsh and Mr A Gee RIBA.