Nonyelu Chukwudozie Okoye v Leena Zachariah & Anor
Decision date: 20 April 2026
Neutral citation: [2026] UKUT 155 (LC)
Overall AI summary confidence: medium
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: medium
This appeal concerned a rent repayment order against Mr Okoye for letting an unlicensed ground‑floor flat; the First‑tier Tribunal found he was the landlord (having received rent and being named on tenancy paperwork) and rejected his defence that council portal/address registration problems gave him a reasonable excuse. The Upper Tribunal reviewed the FTT's factual findings and, on the material before it, allowed the appeal.
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: medium
From the judgment as recorded in the notes, receipt of rent and being named on tenancy documentation are strong indicators that a person is the landlord or the person having control of premises for licensing and rent‑repayment purposes; and an asserted administrative impediment (such as an address missing from a council portal) will not succeed as a reasonable excuse where the person claiming it did not take timely or reasonable steps to investigate or rectify the position.
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 notes record obiter observations that a building‑control certificate that fails to describe works may have limited evidential value in proving a property was recognised as subdivided, and that parties should lead direct evidence about the circumstances of a letting (what an agent told tenants, whether tenancy documents were signed) to avoid factual disputes.