Windermere Marina Village Ltd v Mr Ian Wild Mrs Gillan Lesley Barton

Decision date: 28 May 2014

Neutral citation: [2014] UKUT 163 (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 clause making the landlord’s surveyor’s apportionment of service charges "final and binding" was void under s.27A(6) Landlord and Tenant Act 1985, and whether the First-tier Tribunal (LVT) could substitute its own apportionment. The Upper Tribunal held the finality clause was void under s.27A(6), the LVT was entitled to determine the fair apportionment itself (and replaced the surveyor’s 1:4 split with 1:1), and dismissed the tenants’ remaining challenges including on evidence and s.20C costs. The LVT was also justified in refusing to charge the landlord’s LVT costs to the service charge.

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

Section 27A(6) renders void lease provisions that effectively fix the manner of determining any question capable of determination under s.27A(1) or (3); where such a clause is void the tribunal may determine the matter afresh and is not limited to reviewing only whether a prior third‑party determination was unfair.

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, as guidance, that exercising s.27A jurisdiction in complex mixed‑use estates calls for careful case management (including notice to interested third parties) and that different lease forms may produce different outcomes depending on drafting (for example where a certificate is a condition precedent), though these points do not form the binding ratio.