Rita Akorita v Marina Heights (St. Leonards) Ltd

Decision date: 29 June 2011

Neutral citation: [2011] UKUT 255 (LC)

Overall AI summary confidence: high

AI Notice: Any short overview, ratio decidendi summary or obiter dicta summary shown on this page is AI-generated, provided only to help users assess potential relevance more quickly, and may be wholly inaccurate. No liability is accepted for the accuracy of any such summary, regardless of any AI confidence rating shown. Users should check the underlying decision and obtain appropriate legal advice rather than relying on any summary.

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 a lease provision requiring sums to be "ascertained and certified by the Lessor's Surveyor acting as an expert" was a condition precedent to the tenant's liability to pay service charges, and whether the insurance premiums charged were reasonably incurred under s.19 of the 1985 Act. The tribunal held that the Surveyor's certificate was a condition precedent which had not been satisfied, so no service charge was presently payable for the years in issue, but separately quantified the reasonable insurance premiums and disallowed managing-agent commissions as recoverable insurance costs.

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 lease expressly requires the service charge to be "ascertained and certified by the Lessor's Surveyor acting as an expert," that certification is a condition precedent to the tenant's liability to pay; an accountant's certificate disclaiming any opinion as to reasonableness does not fulfil that lease requirement.

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 noted (but did not decide) possible consequences under section 20B for late or belated certified demands and observed that it can be appropriate for a tribunal to determine the reasonableness of costs (such as insurance) even where a condition precedent presently prevents recovery, to cover potential future certified demands.

Warning

Chunk is repetitive and contains duplicated text; care taken to judgment consolidated points.

Source links

Judgment page Judgment PDF Judgment XML