Milon Miah & Anor v Anchor Court Management (Ipswich) Limited
Decision date: 3 March 2026
Neutral citation: [2026] UKUT 98 (LC)
Overall AI summary confidence: high
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 the construction of clause 3.11 of a long lease requiring "audited accounts" and an auditors' certificate before a lessee must pay any balancing service charge. The Upper Tribunal held that "audit" and "auditors" require external scrutiny (not internal preparation by the respondent) and that production of an auditors' certificate signed by external auditors is a precondition to an individual leaseholder's liability to pay the balancing charge. The tribunal also confirmed that interim payments under clause 3.9 are unaffected.
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 condition expressly requires "audit" and an "auditors' certificate," those words import external examination by persons who are not members of the respondent's staff, and the production of such an auditors' certificate is a condition precedent to liability for a balancing service charge under the lease.
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 tribunal observed (without exploring the point in depth) that considerations of proportionality do not permit substituting internal accounting for an express contractual condition precedent of external audit, and noted the typical practical identity of auditors with accountants and that they cannot be employees of the respondent.