Veena SA v Cheong [2003] EWLands LRX_45_2002 (20 February 2003)

Veena SA v Cheong [2003] EWLands LRX_45_2002 (20 February 2003)

Veena SA failed to show that the LVT's determination that costs of full-time porter and part-time cleaner were not reasonably incurred was wrong; the Tribunal upheld the reduced figures set by the LVT. The Tribunal also upheld the section 20C order excluding landlords' costs from the service charge, finding no just or equitable reason to overturn the LVT's discretion. The cost of replacement of the extractor fan was found to be reasonably incurred.

Citation
[2003] EWLands LRX_45_2002
Parties
Appellant/respondent (landlord): Veena SA; Respondent/appellant (tenant): Eugene Cheong
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
20 February 2003
Procedural Posture
Appeal and Cross Appeal From Leasehold Valuation Tribunal / Final Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; cross-appeal allowed in part.
Legal Topics
Service Charges, Reasonableness of Expenditure, Costs of Tribunal Proceedings, Lease Interpretation
Landlord and Tenant Property Law Service Charges Reasonableness of Expenditure Costs of Tribunal Proceedings Lease Interpretation

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 6 Authorities cited 23 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Veena SA

Appellant/respondent (landlord)

Eugene Cheong

Respondent/appellant (tenant)

Procedural Posture

Appeal and Cross Appeal From Leasehold Valuation Tribunal / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether costs of full-time porter and part-time cleaner were reasonably incurred under section 19(1)(a) of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985
  2. 2 Whether costs of replacement of extractor fan were reasonably incurred
  3. 3 Whether section 20C order of LVT regarding landlords' costs was just and equitable

Ratio Decidendi

Veena SA failed to show that the LVT's determination that costs of full-time porter and part-time cleaner were not reasonably incurred was wrong; the Tribunal upheld the reduced figures set by the LVT. The Tribunal also upheld the section 20C order excluding landlords' costs from the service charge, finding no just or equitable reason to overturn the LVT's discretion. The cost of replacement of the extractor fan was found to be reasonably incurred.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; cross-appeal allowed in part.

Orders

  • Costs of full-time porter and part-time cleaner not recoverable beyond reduced figures set by LVT (£5,000-£6,000 per year).
  • Section 20C order upheld: landlords' costs of LVT proceedings excluded from service charge.