G & A Gorrara Ltd & Ors v Kenilworth Court Block E RTM Co Ltd
Decision date: 8 April 2024
Neutral citation: [2024] UKUT 81 (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 lessees' past unqualified on-account payments and related conduct deprived the First-tier Tribunal (FTT) of jurisdiction under s.27A(4) of the 1985 Act by amounting to "agreement or admission" of final service charges, and whether the appellants were estopped by convention from challenging estate-wide, block-apportioned final charges. The Upper Tribunal held the FTT was wrong to treat payments alone as dispositive of agreement/admission as to final charges and set aside the FTT's estoppel-by-convention finding insofar as it purported to bar challenge to final Block E charges for 2012/13–2015/16. The UT directed that the FTT must determine the final service charges, apportionment and set-off for 2012/13–2019/20.
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
The statutory provision (s.27A(5)) must not be read so that unqualified payment(s) alone automatically amount to agreement or admission of final service charge demands; payments can contribute to an inference of agreement only when considered with other circumstances (such as delay, availability of information and other conduct). Estoppel by convention requires a clear mutual assumption communicated as one on which the other may rely, actual reliance and detriment, and cannot be established in the absence of those elements to defeat statutory RTM limits.
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 suggested that, in service-charge disputes, the "agreement/admission" provision is a simpler and more appropriate mechanism than estoppel by convention to preclude late challenges, and that estoppel by convention is unlikely to be suitable for defeating statutory rights under the RTM regime; the UT also recommended practical case management (a single comprehensive hearing) to resolve remaining accounting and apportionment issues.