- Landlord’s service charge certificate conclusive and binding on issues of law? (Sara & Hossein Asset Holdings Ltd v Blacks Outdoor Retail Ltd)
- What are the practical implications of this case?
- What was the background?
- What did the court decide?
- Case details
Property Disputes analysis: This appeal was against the deputy master’s refusal (reported in Sara & Hossein Asset Holdings Ltd v Blacks Outdoor Retail to dismiss the tenant’s (Blacks) counterclaim or to grant a summary money judgement in relation to the landlord’s (Sara & Hossein Asset Holdings Ltd (S&H)) claim for rent of over £400,000. It raised complicated issues concerning the construction and inter-relation between a set-off clause and a certification provision. The judge held that the landlord’s service charge certificate was not an expert determination and neither it nor the no set-off provision prevented the tenant’s defence that the certified sums did not properly form part of the service charge and were therefore not lawfully due under the lease. The no set-off provision did not operate against sums which were not lawfully due under the lease. Written by Morayo Fagborun Bennett, barrister, at Hardwicke.
Sign in or take a trial to read the full analysis.
To continue reading this news article, as well as thousands of others like it, sign in to LexisPSL or register for a free trial