Richard Jonathan Greening v Castelnau Mansions Ltd
Decision date: 17 August 2011
Neutral citation: [2011] UKUT 326 (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 £4,663 of solicitors' fees incurred in collecting Mr Greening's unpaid service charges could be recovered from him via the lease's service charge provisions. The Upper Tribunal held those recovery costs did not fall within clause 5(5)(j)(ii) or the lease's "Total Expenditure" and reduced Mr Greening's liability by his 1.81608% share of that sum (£84.68). The Tribunal also held that events occurring after the lease (including collective enfranchisement) could not be used to alter the lease's meaning.
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 binding ratio is that where lease wording does not expressly or unambiguously include solicitors' or litigation costs, ordinary references to management, administration or "professional persons" will not be construed to cover solicitors' costs of recovering arrears; and subsequent changes in ownership or other events after the lease do not alter the proper construction of the lease terms.
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 judgment noted (obiter) that, although it may be practically desirable for a tenant-owned landlord to recover such legal fees through the service charge, desirability does not justify departing from the lease's clear meaning; and that some legal costs might still be recoverable as county court costs if separately awarded.