Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
England and Wales decisions
Decisions matching the current search
The Upper Tribunal allowed a service charge appeal after holding that the FTT unfairly decided an insurance-lease issue not raised by the parties.
Regent on the River Ltd v Bishop & Anor [2026] EWHC 803 (Ch) (19 March 2026)
The High Court dismissed a landlord’s appeal over repair liability for glass penthouse panels, holding they formed part of the roof, not windows, under the lease.
The Upper Tribunal upheld the FTT’s discretionary orders limiting costs recovery under section 20C and paragraph 5A, and refused reimbursement of fees.
The Upper Tribunal held that time was of the essence for a lease clause requiring prior notice of estimated service charges, so a late 2024 notice did not make the interim charges payable in advance.
Progressive failure of window seals and glazed units, evidenced by increasing failed units and loss of inert gas, constitutes physical deterioration and disrepair under the lease covenants, regardless of whether the defect was latent at installation.
Source excerpt
Better Intelligent Management Ltd & Anor v Zaid Alothman Holding Ltd & Ors [2026] EWHC 371 (Ch) (06 February 2026)
The High Court held that progressive failure of window seals and glazed units caused physical deterioration and amounted to disrepair under the leases.
The Upper Tribunal dismissed an appeal about balcony flooring in a block of flats, holding that the management company was responsible for repair and could, on the facts then known, replace timber balconies with non-combustible material.
The term 'Commercial Block' as varied means the ground floor of the building (excluding the lift), not the whole building or only the demised units. The First-tier Tribunal's construction was wrong and irrational. The appellant is liable for service charges relating to the ground floor only, apportioned accordingly.
Source excerpt
Demolition of the buildings falls within the scope of the qualified covenant against alterations in clause 2(vii) of the lease. The landlord’s refusal of consent, based on the user covenant and other grounds, was unreasonable in the particular circumstances, given the buildings’ redundancy and the need to implement planning permission. The tenant is entitled to demolish the buildings, and demolition does not breach the repairing covenant or constitute waste under the lease.
Source excerpt
The Upper Tribunal allowed a landlord-and-tenant appeal in part, finding additional lease breaches relating to terrace structures and Airbnb use affecting insurance.
Explore more
