BAM Buchanan Ltd v Arcadia Group Ltd [2013] ScotCS CSOH_107A (05 July 2013)

BAM Buchanan Ltd v Arcadia Group Ltd [2013] ScotCS CSOH_107A (05 July 2013)

The court upheld the majority of the expert's decisions, finding no material errors of law in his approach to the remit, interpretation of the lease, or assessment of reasonableness and scope of service charge and dilapidations claims. However, the court found errors of law or inadequate reasoning in the expert's treatment of certain small items (misreading of an email, allocation of costs, and explanation for disallowing redecoration claim), and directed the expert to reconsider those items with further submissions if necessary.

Citation
[2013] ScotCS CSOH_107A
Parties
Pursuer: BAM Buchanan Limited; Defender: Arcadia Group Limited
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
05 July 2013
Procedural Posture
Commercial Lease/service Charge and Dilapidations Dispute / Opinion on Legal Objections to Expert's Draft Report; Directions to Expert
Outcome
Partially upheld objections; majority of expert's decisions sustained; certain items remitted for reconsideration and clarification.
Legal Topics
Service Charges Under Commercial Leases, Dilapidations, Remit to Expert/surveyor, Scope of Judicial Review of Expert's Report, Interpretation of Lease Provisions, Recovery of Costs and Betterment, Obligations of Tenant on Termination
Property Law Landlord and Tenant Contract Law Civil Procedure Service Charges Under Commercial Leases Dilapidations Remit to Expert/surveyor Scope of Judicial Review of Expert's Report +3 more

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 5 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

BAM Buchanan Limited

Pursuer

Arcadia Group Limited

Defender

Procedural Posture

Commercial Lease/service Charge and Dilapidations Dispute / Opinion on Legal Objections to Expert's Draft Report; Directions to Expert

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the expert (reporter) erred in law in his draft report on disputed service charge and dilapidations claims under a commercial lease
  2. 2 Whether the expert misconstrued the lease or misapplied legal principles in excluding or reducing certain claims
  3. 3 Whether the expert failed to give adequate reasons or failed to exhaust his remit

Ratio Decidendi

The court upheld the majority of the expert's decisions, finding no material errors of law in his approach to the remit, interpretation of the lease, or assessment of reasonableness and scope of service charge and dilapidations claims. However, the court found errors of law or inadequate reasoning in the expert's treatment of certain small items (misreading of an email, allocation of costs, and explanation for disallowing redecoration claim), and directed the expert to reconsider those items with further submissions if necessary.

Court Disposition

Partially upheld objections; majority of expert's decisions sustained; certain items remitted for reconsideration and clarification.

Orders

  • Case to be put out by order for parties to submit draft directions reflecting the court's findings.
  • Expert (reporter) to reconsider specific items identified in paragraphs [15], [22], [35], and [54] with further submissions as appropriate.