Reeves v Blake

Why this case matters

Reeves v Blake is important because it addresses Can surveyors award costs of contemplated common-law/equitable litigation under s10?. The recorded decision is that no. Costs power is confined to the statutory dispute-resolution mechanism. In practice, the case is relevant because surveyors cannot determine or fund through an award matters lying wholly outside the Act.

What happened

Surveyors awarded legal costs incurred preparing threatened injunction proceedings arising around a party-wall project.

The practical significance of the background is that the court's conclusion must be read against the particular procedural and factual setting recorded above. A party wall authority should not be treated as deciding a wider proposition merely because similar terminology appears in another dispute.

Question before the court

Can surveyors award costs of contemplated common-law/equitable litigation under s10?

This is the issue around which the case should be read. In applying the decision, separate that legal question from other factual disagreements between the owners and from matters the court was not required to determine.

Decision

No. Costs power is confined to the statutory dispute-resolution mechanism.

The decision should therefore be used for the proposition actually resolved by the court, rather than as a general answer to every dispute involving the same section of the Act.

What it means in practice

Surveyors cannot determine or fund through an award matters lying wholly outside the Act.

For surveyors, the useful discipline is to identify the statutory power or duty relied upon, establish that the factual preconditions are present, and then ask whether the proposed step is necessary and supported in this particular case.

What the case does not decide

This summary should not be read as extending the decision beyond the question identified above. It does not, without more, establish that the same result follows where the notices, appointments, works, evidence or procedural history are materially different. Check the full judgment and later authorities before treating the case as determinative of a new set of facts.

Building-owner lesson

Question whether claimed costs arise from the statutory dispute or separate litigation.

Adjoining-owner lesson

Litigation costs may require recovery through the court, not the award.

Surveyor lesson

Identify the statutory dispute and stay within it.

Questions to ask before relying on this case

• Is the legal question in the present matter actually the same as the question decided here?
• Are the statutory notices, appointments and jurisdictional steps materially the same?
• Are there factual differences that could justify a different result?
• Has a later or higher authority qualified, distinguished or displaced the proposition?
• Is the proposed reliance correct, necessary and supported in this particular case?

Key passages / points

Paras 20–23 are central: 'dispute' means a dispute arising under the Act.

Related cases

Power v Shah; Group One v Keane; Woodhouse