Peverel OM Limited v (1) Andrew Stephen Wernick (2) Jenny Isabella Wernick
Decision date: 15 November 2010
Neutral citation: [2010] UKUT 402 (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 Peverel OM Ltd could recover particular 2005/06 service‑charge items for The Heights, notably concierge/on‑costs and various miscellaneous items. The Lands Tribunal dismissed Peverel's appeal on concierge and on‑costs, increasing the disallowance to £12,239.63 for unsupported or excessive items, but allowed the appeal on miscellaneous items, raising the recoverable figure for those items to £15,884.36. The Tribunal also directed that Peverel's costs of the Lands Tribunal proceedings are not to be treated as relevant service‑charge costs recoverable from residents.
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
Service‑charge expenditure must be reasonably incurred and supported by adequate documentary evidence; generic or unexplained invoices and unsupported items (including excessive consumable use or unexplained petty cash) cannot be recovered as service charges.
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 that conduct before the LVT is not relevant to a costs order in the Lands Tribunal; only conduct in the appeal proceedings bears on whether appeal costs should be ordered. It also noted that pursuing multiple contested items on appeal can, in principle, make recovery of appeal costs reasonable, although discretion may be exercised differently in particular cases.