(1)UNION PENSION TRUSTEES LIMITED (2) PAUL BLISS v MRS MAUREEN SLAVIN
Decision date: 11 May 2015
Neutral citation: [2015] UKUT 103 (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 whether freeholders could recover as service charges (a) payments to a contractor for major remedial works where no contractor invoice was produced, and (b) legal costs of tribunal proceedings. The Tribunal allowed the appeal on the invoice/evidence point, holding that absence of an invoice is relevant but the FTT should have considered that absence against the totality of corroborative evidence and so remitted the matter for rehearing and further evidence. The appeal was dismissed on legal costs: the lease did not clearly and unambiguously permit recovery of tribunal/legal costs as service charge items, so the FTT was right to disallow them.
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
A tribunal may treat the absence of a contractor’s invoice as a relevant factor but must assess that absence in the context of all available evidence; it cannot exclude claimed expenditure solely for lack of an invoice without considering corroborative materials. Separately, broad or general service‑charge wording (eg “any other costs”) will not permit recovery of legal or tribunal costs where the lease contains specific provisions that distinguish or imply those costs were not intended to be charged via the 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 decision contains observational guidance that if a tribunal makes credibility findings central to its decision it should record them and give the witness an opportunity to address adverse findings. There is also comment that historical expectations about recoverability of court costs from defaulting tenants may inform interpretation of general charging words in older leases.