Joan Philomena Antoinette Lardy Linka Leif Lardy v Rene Van Gytenbeek

Decision date: 5 September 2011

Neutral citation: [2010] UKUT 347 (LC)

Overall AI summary confidence: high

AI Notice: Any short overview, ratio decidendi summary or obiter dicta summary shown on this page is AI-generated, provided only to help users assess potential relevance more quickly, and may be wholly inaccurate. No liability is accepted for the accuracy of any such summary, regardless of any AI confidence rating shown. Users should check the underlying decision and obtain appropriate legal advice rather than relying on any summary.

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: high

This appeal concerned whether lessees of Flats 2 and 6 at Rockstead must contribute to specified common works and when service charges fall due, under their leases and s.27A LTA 1985. The Upper Tribunal held Flat 2 must pay one-sixth of costs for roofs, foundations and items in the Sixth Schedule (including costs relating to rebuilt Flat 6), and Flat 6 lessees must pay one-sixth for shared items (driveway, external paths, shared service pipes, roofs and foundations) but are not solely liable for Flat 6's structure. The LVT was wrong to treat Flat 6 lessees as solely liable or to rely on a post-dated licence to bind appellants; the appeal was otherwise dismissed and the matter was remitted to the LVT to quantify amounts.

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: high

Where a lease requires lessees to pay a stated fractional share of costs "to include" specified items (for example roofs and foundations), those words can extend the lessees' liability to those items even if they are not literally "shared"; rebuilt or substantially altered parts remain part of "the Premises" for service charge purposes where the lease contemplates rebuilding/reconstruction, so costs related to such rebuilding can fall within the apportioned service charge.

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 notes suggest obiter points that apportionment schemes in leases may require qualification where other provisions (such as separate apportionments for a garden) indicate apportionment by number of sharers, and that licences executed between landlord and third parties after grant do not bind lessees or create indemnity obligations if the lessees are not party to them.