header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
21 October 2016 / Joseph Ollech , Philip Sissons
Issue: 7719 / Categories: Features , Property
printer mail-detail

Money back guarantee? (Pt 2)

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.
nlj_7718_sissons_0

In the second part in the series, Philip Sissons & Joseph Ollech study costs recovery in long residential lease disputes
  • Alternative, contractual, routes to cost recovery where recent case-law has clarified the extent to which a landlord might be able to recoup legal costs via the service charge.

In Pt 1 we considered the scope of the First-Tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) FTT’s jurisdiction to award costs under the 2013 rules which govern its procedure and the recent decision of the Upper Tribunal in Willow Court Management Co (1985) Ltd v Alexander [2016] UKUT 290 (LC) clarifying the scope of that jursidiction. Here we focus on the second alternative route by which a landlord might be able to recoup costs incurred in proceedings before the FTT; passing the costs through the service charge so that all of the tenants within the service charge regime pay a share. Of course, whether or not a landlord can pursue this course of action will depend primarly on the particular wording of the lease in question. However,

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Read All
NLJ Career Profile: Daniel Burbeary, Michelman Robinson

NLJ Career Profile: Daniel Burbeary, Michelman Robinson

Daniel Burbeary, office managing partner of Michelman Robinson, discusses launching in London, the power of the law, and what the kitchen can teach us about litigating

Joelson—Jennifer Mansoor

Joelson—Jennifer Mansoor

West End firm strengthens employment and immigration team with partner hire

JMW—Belinda Brooke

JMW—Belinda Brooke

Employment and people solutions offering boosted by partner hire

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: CPR tweak closes third-party disclosure gap
A seemingly dry procedural update may prove potent. In his latest 'Civil way' column for NLJ this week, Stephen Gold explains that new CPR 31.12A—part of the 193rd update—fills a ‘lacuna’ exposed in McLaren Indy v Alpa Racing
NLJ this week: Court of Appeals wrestles with Mazur fallout
The long-running Mazur saga edged towards its finale as the Court of Appeal heard arguments on whether non-solicitors can ‘conduct litigation’. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School reports from a packed courtroom where 16 wigs watched Nick Bacon KC argue that Mr Justice Sheldon had failed to distinguish between ‘tasks and responsibilities’
NLJ this week: Appeal court reins in ‘wrong defendant’ switcheroo

The Court of Appeal has slammed the brakes on claimants trying to swap defendants after limitation has expired. In Adcamp LLP v Office Properties and BDB Pitmans v Lee [2026] EWCA Civ 50, it overturned High Court rulings that had allowed substitutions under s 35(6)(b) of the Limitation Act 1980, reports Sarah Crowther of DAC Beachcroft in this week's NLJ

NLJ this week: Driving test fraudsters steer towards jail
Cheating in driving tests is surging—and courts are responding firmly. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Parpworth of De Montfort Law School charts a rise in impersonation and tech-assisted fraud, with 2,844 attempts recorded in a year
NLJ this week: Deepfakes demand data law muscle
As AI-generated ‘deepfake’ images proliferate, the law may already have the tools to respond. In NLJ this week, Jon Belcher of Excello Law argues that such images amount to personal data processing under UK GDPR
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll