Scotland’s Upper Tribunal has dismissed Tomasz Gorecki’s request to challenge a ruling that found him liable for £9,350 in unpaid rent and ordered his eviction from a property he had rented since July 2010, where monthly payments had risen to £500 before arrears accumulated in March 2024.
Following a case management discussion in February 2026, the First-tier Tribunal granted the landlords, Norman Brown and Anna Bisset, an order for possession and a separate order requiring Mr Gorecki to pay £9,350 in rent arrears. The First-tier Tribunal held that the notice to quit and section 33 notice had been validly served and that the landlords had complied with the applicable pre-action requirements.
Eviction and Arrears Orders
The First-tier Tribunal considered eviction reasonable because no rent had been paid from September 2024, the landlords intended to sell the property once they recovered possession, and relations between the parties had broken down. Mr Gorecki maintained that the tribunal had failed to consider allegations of harassment, intimidation, and other issues, and argued that the tribunal had repeatedly interrupted him and prevented him from presenting his case.
Gorecki further contended that the tribunal erred on landlord registration rules, res judicata, and procedural fairness, asserting that the panel relied on unverified landlord claims while overlooking his evidence. After the First-tier Tribunal denied his appeal bid, he sought a review from the Upper Tribunal on both the eviction and rent arrears.
Sheriff George Jamieson clarified that no automatic appeal exists against a First-tier Tribunal’s refusal to grant permission. Instead, the Upper Tribunal reassesses the request independently. He ruled that the tribunal had not acted unfairly by evaluating Gorecki’s harassment claims without a full evidentiary session.
The Upper Tribunal observed that the essential matters relevant to possession and rent were not disputed: the tenancy had been validly terminated, and the rent arrears were admitted. Sheriff Jamieson held that the tribunal had been entitled to conclude that an evidential hearing on the harassment allegations was unnecessary to dispose of the applications justly.
Read Also: Pub manager infringed football league copyright
Rejection of Grounds for Appeal
Mr Gorecki also argued that the new First-tier Tribunal proceedings were barred because the landlords had previously raised proceedings in Livingston Sheriff Court, which were dismissed for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. The Upper Tribunal rejected that contention, stating that a court has inherent jurisdiction to determine the limits of its own jurisdiction, and dismissal on the basis that proceedings had been brought in the wrong forum did not create res judicata.
A further ground concerned the registration status of one of the landlords. Mr Gorecki argued that an alleged failure to comply with landlord registration requirements affected the landlords’ ability to recover rent. The Upper Tribunal held that this was incorrect, referring to section 94(3) of the Antisocial Behaviour etc. (Scotland) Act 2004, which states that a notice under that provision can have the effect that no rent is payable during a specified period, but there was no suggestion that such a notice had been served in the present case.
The Upper Tribunal also rejected Mr Gorecki’s allegation of apparent bias, applying the test in Porter v Magill. Sheriff Jamieson held that no fair-minded and informed observer, having considered the facts, would conclude that there was a real possibility that the First-tier Tribunal had been biased against him.
The only point that caused the Upper Tribunal some concern was Mr Gorecki’s attempt to suspend enforcement of the orders while permission to appeal was being considered. The Upper Tribunal observed that there “may well be an arguable point of law” concerning the matter, but it had become academic because permission to appeal against the underlying possession and payment orders was being refused.
As none of the grounds directed at the original First-tier Tribunal decisions disclosed an arguable error of law, permission to appeal was refused. The decision is not itself subject to a right of appeal, although Mr Gorecki may apply within 14 days for reconsideration of the permission decision at a hearing, and the landlords are now able to proceed with the eviction and rent arrears orders, with the Upper Tribunal’s decision noting that the £9,350 in rent arrears remains payable.
The Upper Tribunal’s ruling addresses the application of landlord registration requirements and res judicata in eviction proceedings.
