Fah Hor Chong v Eleonora Angela Severgnini & Ors
Decision date: 26 June 2026
Neutral citation: [2026] UKUT 239 (LC)
Overall AI summary confidence: medium
Short overview
This short overview is intended to summarise the case, issues and outcome so far as they are supported by the judgment.
AI confidence in this short overview: medium
This appeal concerns rent repayment orders made against a landlord for an unlicensed HMO and whether the First-tier Tribunal's redetermination was unjust because it failed to consider documents the landlord emailed to the FTT on 16 May 2024, mistakenly believing they had only been sent to the Upper Tribunal. The FTT rejected the landlord's "reasonable excuse" defence and applied mitigation for steps taken toward licensing, reducing the order to 35% of rents (£8,318.76). Permission to appeal was granted and the Upper Tribunal reviewed the limited procedural and legal issues rather than rehearing all factual findings.
Ratio decidendi
This summary is intended to identify the ratio decidendi, meaning the legal reasons for deciding and the binding part of the decision.
AI confidence in this ratio decidendi summary: medium
A tribunal should treat material properly sent to it before a hearing as available for consideration, and a mistaken belief that such material is only before an appellate tribunal can raise a real question whether a decision is unjust by reason of procedural irregularity; in assessing a "reasonable excuse" for letting without a licence, the tribunal may examine whether a landlord took reasonable steps to follow up on assurances or licensing steps and whether contemporaneous responses to enforcement correspondence mention the asserted assurances.
Obiter dicta
This summary is intended to identify obiter dicta, meaning observations made by the way that were not necessary to deciding the case and are not binding.
AI confidence in this obiter dicta summary: medium
The judgment observed that personal circumstances (health or family distractions) can be relevant to excuse but do not automatically justify failing to verify licensing status where the landlord continued to relet rooms; it also noted that directions about evidence should make clear whether documents filed in earlier proceedings remain available without a fresh application.