Shanmuganathan Paskaran v Blue Bricks London Limtied

Facts

Mr Paskaran is the tenant of commercial premises at 96 South Ealing Road, London, where he runs a grocery shop, under a lease dated 15 September 2010 granted by Blue Bricks London Limited. Schedule 4 of the lease sets out the rent review provisions. If the parties cannot agree on a surveyor, either may apply to the President of the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors to appoint one. Unless the parties agree otherwise, the surveyor acts as an arbitrator under the Arbitration Act 1996. On the landlord's application, Mr Robert Pratt was appointed arbitrator, and he confirmed this by letter dated 16 January 2025. The arbitration was then delayed. On 18 August 2025 the tenant issued County Court proceedings. He sought a determination of the rent payable from September 2020 and a declaration that the arbitration clause was inoperative under section 9(4) of the Arbitration Act 1996. The landlord acknowledged service, ticking the box stating an intention to defend. It then applied to strike out the rent review parts of the claim under CPR 3.4 or, alternatively, to stay them under section 9(1) of the Arbitration Act 1996. It served a defence expressed to be without prejudice to that application. On 13 January 2026 District Judge Jenkins held that, by invoking the court's strike-out jurisdiction as its primary position, the landlord had taken a step in the proceedings under section 9(3) of the Arbitration Act 1996. He therefore dismissed the stay application, although he said he would otherwise have granted a stay. HHJ Genn granted the landlord permission to appeal.