Julia Beer & Anor v Daisy Dance & Anor
Decision date: 2 February 2026
Neutral citation: [2026] UKUT 46 (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 the First-tier Tribunal (FTT) had properly determined that statutory consultation under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 had not been shown in respect of roof works. The Upper Tribunal found a serious procedural irregularity because documentary evidence of consultation referred to in the earlier FTT decision was not placed before the FTT and therefore the FTT could not properly decide that issue. The UT set aside the FTT’s decision on consultation and remitted that issue to the FTT for further consideration and directions.
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
Where a tribunal is deprived of relevant documentary material that it should have had when determining a contested statutory consultation issue, that procedural irregularity can justify setting aside the tribunal’s decision on that point; parties and tribunals must ensure hearing bundles are complete and relevant material is brought to the tribunal’s attention.
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 observed that the appellants ideally should have sought to include or produce the documents at the hearing, though confusion from a late and poorly organised bundle explained their failure; the UT suggested that if the respondents wish to pursue the challenge they should seek directions for a fresh FTT hearing and ensure complete bundles.