Spender & Ors v Fit Nominee Ltd & Anor [2025] EWCA Civ 1578 (05 December 2025)
The correct test for 'reasonably incurred' under s.19(1) of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 is whether, judged by reference to the circumstances at the time the landlord entered into the contractual obligation, the decision to incur the costs was reasonable in both process and outcome. The fact that costs payable in later years under a long-term contract exceed market rates does not, by itself, render them unreasonable if the original decision was reasonable. The burden of proof lies on the party asserting unreasonableness to establish a prima facie case, after which the court decides on the whole evidence.
- Citation
- [2025] EWCA Civ 1578
- Parties
- Appellants: Liam Philip Spender & 69 Others; Respondent: Fit Nominee Ltd; Respondent: Fit Nominee 2 Ltd
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 05 December 2025
- Procedural Posture
- Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment
- Outcome
- Appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Service Charges, Long Term Contracts, Reasonableness of Costs, Burden of Proof, Leasehold, Statutory Interpretation
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Liam Philip Spender & 69 Others
Appellants
Fit Nominee Ltd
Respondent
Fit Nominee 2 Ltd
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether costs incurred under long-term contracts for equipment hire and maintenance were 'reasonably incurred' under s.19 Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 and recoverable as service charges
- 2 Correct test for reasonableness under s.19 in context of long-term agreements
- 3 Allocation of risk for long-term contracts where market prices change
Ratio Decidendi
The correct test for 'reasonably incurred' under s.19(1) of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 is whether, judged by reference to the circumstances at the time the landlord entered into the contractual obligation, the decision to incur the costs was reasonable in both process and outcome. The fact that costs payable in later years under a long-term contract exceed market rates does not, by itself, render them unreasonable if the original decision was reasonable. The burden of proof lies on the party asserting unreasonableness to establish a prima facie case, after which the court decides on the whole evidence.
Court Disposition
Appeal dismissed
Orders
- The Judge's substituted decision is upheld; costs under the Countryside Contracts for 2018-2020, subject to the landlord's concession of 25% reduction for 2020, are recoverable as service charges.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment