Reedbase Ltd & Anor v Fattal & Ors

Reedbase Ltd & Anor v Fattal & Ors

The landlord satisfied the obligation to make good damage under the lease, as the works restored or improved the premises and any consequential loss to the tenants’ property (plants) was due to the tenants’ own failure to water them. The consultation requirements were met; the changes to the works did not require a repeat of stage 2 consultation as the tenants were adequately informed, approved the changes, and the increase in cost was proportionally small. The appeal on all grounds fails.

Parties
Claimant/respondent: Reedbase Limited; Defendant/appellant: Fattal
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
19 April 2018
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Service Charges, Consultation Requirements, Breach of Covenant, Damages, Statutory Interpretation
Landlord and Tenant Law Property Law Service Charges Consultation Requirements Breach of Covenant Damages Statutory 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 2 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Reedbase Limited

Claimant/respondent

Fattal

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the landlord satisfied the obligation to make good damage to the demised premises under the underlease
  2. 2 Whether the landlord conducted sufficient consultation with tenants under the Service Charges (Consultation Requirements) (England) Regulations 2003
  3. 3 Whether the trial judge erred in calculation of damages

Ratio Decidendi

The landlord satisfied the obligation to make good damage under the lease, as the works restored or improved the premises and any consequential loss to the tenants’ property (plants) was due to the tenants’ own failure to water them. The consultation requirements were met; the changes to the works did not require a repeat of stage 2 consultation as the tenants were adequately informed, approved the changes, and the increase in cost was proportionally small. The appeal on all grounds fails.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed on all issues
  • No order as to damages as the issue did not arise