{“content”:[]}
Seven party wall awards, made over three years and granting substantial damages, were declared void because the surveyors who signed them no longer had the power to act. That is the outcome of Fernando v London Borough of Newham, a county court appeal under section 10(17) of the Party Wall etc. Act 1996 decided by His Honour Judge Parfitt in June 2024, and it is why party wall surveyor jurisdiction has become one of the most discussed topics among London practitioners in 2026 [1][2]. Commentary on the case by Nicholas Isaac KC appeared in Estates Gazette on 25 July 2026, and with the new RICS expert witness standard taking effect on 30 November 2026, November is a sensible moment for building owners, adjoining owners and surveyors to review how later disputes are handled [1][3].
Key Takeaways
- A party wall surveyor’s authority comes from a written appointment under section 10(1) of the Act, and it ends when the dispute the surveyor was appointed to resolve has been settled [1][2].
- In Fernando v Newham the original 2012 surveyors issued a “Further Award” in 2020 without a fresh written appointment; the court held they were functus officio and that the later awards were made without jurisdiction [1][2].
- An earlier decision by the same judge, K Group Holdings Inc v Saidco International SA (2021), rejected the idea that a surveyor can take an “overarching jurisdiction” over anything that might arise later [1].
- New damage appearing years after an award usually needs a new written appointment, or a fresh appointment process, before any further award can be made [2].
- Awards can still be appealed to the county court within 14 days under section 10(17), where surveyors may give expert evidence under CPR Part 35 [1].
Why party wall surveyor jurisdiction matters
Under the Party Wall etc. Act 1996, surveyors are not appointed for life. They are appointed to settle a specific dispute that has arisen, or is deemed to have arisen, after a notice is served. Section 10(1) requires each appointment to be in writing. Section 10(16) makes an award conclusive unless it is appealed, and section 10(17) gives either owner 14 days from service to appeal to the county court.
The question that has caused trouble is what happens when the works are finished, the award has been complied with, and then something goes wrong years later. Can the same surveyors simply pick up where they left off? Fernando v Newham says no, unless their appointment actually covers the new dispute [1][2].
Fernando v Newham: how seven awards became void
The facts, as reported by practitioners, run as follows [2].
- In 2011 the London Borough of Newham decided to demolish 44 Barrington Road. In early 2012 it served party wall notices on Mr and Mrs Fernando at number 42, who appointed their own surveyor.
- The primary award was served on 22 February 2012. Number 44 was demolished and the party wall was propped on concrete pad foundations, designed at about 1 metre deep but built at 0.53 metres.
- In August 2018 the foundations subsided, pulling the party wall outward and damaging number 42.
- In October 2020 the original surveyors issued a “Further Award” blaming the inadequate support, without obtaining a written re-appointment for the new dispute. Further awards followed, with the seventh served on 5 May 2023.
- A separate dispute about other damage between 2012 and 2016 had already been settled in ordinary court proceedings without the surveyors.
The Fernandos appealed the seventh award under section 10(17). The judge set it aside on jurisdictional grounds: the original surveyors had become functus officio once the 2012 dispute was resolved, so the further awards were made without jurisdiction and were void. The seventh award was also set aside for breach of natural justice, because the Fernandos had not been given a fair opportunity to present their case [1][2].
The surveyors appointed under the original notice “had become functus following the resolution of that dispute” and the further awards “would appear to have been made without jurisdiction and are consequentially void.”, summary of the judgment in Estates Gazette, 25 July 2026 [1]
K Group v Saidco: no overarching party wall surveyor jurisdiction
Fernando did not come out of nowhere. In K Group Holdings Inc v Saidco International SA, decided in the Central London County Court on 19 July 2021, the same judge dealt with works carried out between 2009 and 2013 under a 2009 award. He said a surveyor cannot “take for himself a sort of overarching jurisdiction to determine anything that might arise at any point”, and found that “There was no relevant dispute” to support the later award [1].
Taken together, the two decisions give a two-part test for party wall surveyor jurisdiction after the first award [1]:
- Does a subsequent dispute actually exist?
- Does the surveyor’s written appointment cover that dispute?
If the answer to either question is no, the surveyor has no power to make a further award.
When jurisdiction continues and when it ends
Not every later issue needs a new appointment. Practitioners draw the line like this [1][2]:
A point that surprises many owners is the difference between the two sides’ paperwork. Building owners’ standard appointment wording often covers later disputes; adjoining owners’ wording rarely does [1]. The role of each is explained on the building owner’s surveyor and adjoining owner’s surveyor pages.
What London owners should do when damage appears after an award
Most secondary disputes involve damage caused by the building owner’s works and the compensation due under section 7(2), which requires the building owner to compensate adjoining owners for loss or damage caused by the works [1]. If cracks appear in a Fulham terrace or a Hackney conversion two years after the award, the following steps keep any new award on solid ground.
- Read the appointment letters. Check whether each surveyor’s written appointment extends to subsequent disputes. If it does not, stop before anyone signs a further award.
- Agree a fresh written appointment. Both owners can re-appoint the same surveyors for the new dispute, or appoint afresh, but the appointment must be in writing under section 10(1).
- Do not rely on an “ongoing jurisdiction” clause in the original award. Fernando shows that such wording does not create authority that the Act does not give [2].
- Observe natural justice. Both owners must be given a fair and adequate chance to present their case before any award is made [2].
- Keep an eye on the 14-day appeal window under section 10(17) once a valid award is served.
- Consider the court route. Where the surveyors are functus, a damage claim may have to go to court rather than through a further award, as the earlier 2012 to 2016 dispute in Fernando did [2].
Owners who are unsure whether their original award still has life in it can find a summary of what an award does on the party wall awards page, and the notice process on the party wall notices page.
Expert evidence in section 10(17) appeals and the RICS 5th edition
When an award is appealed, or when a damage claim goes to court because the surveyors are functus, party wall surveyors frequently appear as expert witnesses. In court, that role is governed by Part 35 of the Civil Procedure Rules, under which the expert’s overriding duty is to the court and not to the owner who instructed them.
From 30 November 2026 a second layer applies. The RICS professional standard Surveyors acting as expert witnesses (5th edition), published on 30 July 2026, takes effect on that date. Among other things it requires experts to disclose any use of AI in preparing evidence, to disclose financial dependence on an instructing party, to include mandatory declarations in their reports, and to keep a strict separation between the expert role and the advocate role [3]. For a party wall surveyor who has acted for one owner during the award process and is later asked to give evidence in the same matter, that separation deserves careful thought before accepting the instruction.
Checklist for surveyors reviewing their files in November 2026
- Review standard appointment letters so that they state clearly whether subsequent and secondary disputes are covered [1].
- Where a client reports new damage after a concluded award, obtain a new written appointment before taking any step towards a further award [2].
- Record how each owner was given the opportunity to make representations.
- Keep expert witness work and award-making work separate, and prepare for the 30 November 2026 RICS standard [3].
Frequently asked questions
Can the same surveyors deal with new damage years after the award?
Only if a new dispute exists and their written appointment covers it. Otherwise a fresh written appointment is required, as Fernando v Newham shows [1][2].
Is an award with an “ongoing jurisdiction” clause safe?
No. The clause cannot give surveyors a power that the Act does not provide, and awards made on that basis were declared void in Fernando [2].
What is the time limit for appealing a party wall award?
Either owner has 14 days from service of the award to appeal to the county court under section 10(17).
Conclusion
Party wall surveyor jurisdiction is narrower than many owners and some surveyors assumed. K Group v Saidco and Fernando v Newham confirm that authority is tied to a specific dispute and a written appointment, and that it ends when that dispute is resolved [1][2]. London owners who discover damage after an award should check the appointment letters first, obtain a fresh written appointment where needed, and avoid relying on ongoing-jurisdiction wording. Surveyors should review their standard letters now and prepare for the RICS expert witness standard that takes effect on 30 November 2026 [3]. This article is general information rather than legal advice; owners facing a live dispute should take advice from a solicitor and an experienced party wall surveyor.
References
- When Is a Party Wall Surveyor Not a Party Wall Surveyor. tanfieldchambers.co.uk.
- Party Wall Surveyors Ongoing Jurisdiction. bandsc.co.uk.
- Surveyors Acting as Expert Witnesses. rics.org.