header-logo header-logo

The costs of poor behaviour

23 October 2024
Issue: 8091 / Categories: Legal News , Property , Leasehold
printer mail-detail

The Court of Appeal has clarified the rule on payment of costs where one party acts unreasonably

In Lea & Others v GP Ilfracombe Management Company [2024] EWCA Civ 1241, the leaseholders of properties at Ilfracombe Holiday Park had successfully challenged a claim for £2.4m service charge brought against them by the managing agents.

The first tier tribunal (FTT) can make an order for costs against a party if that party has acted unreasonably in bringing, defending or conducting the proceedings. Otherwise, proceedings are cost-neutral.

The leaseholders’ appeal concerned, first, the appropriate test to be applied where one party claims the other has acted unreasonably. Second, it concerned whether the FTT erred in law by concluding the management company did not act unreasonably.

Delivering the main judgment, Lord Justice Coulson noted the relevant case law states that unreasonable conduct ‘can include conduct which is vexatious or designed to harass, but it does not require such conduct’. He said deciding whether conduct was unreasonable was a fact-specific exercise.

Coulson LJ said: ‘A good practical rule is for the tribunal to ask: would a reasonable person acting reasonably have acted in this way? Is there a reasonable explanation for the conduct in issue?’

On the second question, Coulson LJ said the service charge demand was ‘an abuse of the process: a claim for a huge sum of money that was unsupported by anyone, unjustified by any independent documentation, and known by its creator… to be invalid. Unsurprisingly, the claim failed in its entirety. In such circumstances, the bringing of the claim by [the management company] in the first place, and its conduct throughout the FTT proceedings, would prima facie appear to have been unreasonable’.

Coulson LJ ordered the management company to pay all the leaseholders’ costs of the tribunal proceedings, including the hearing.

Issue: 8091 / Categories: Legal News , Property , Leasehold
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire

Gilson Gray—Jeremy Davy

Gilson Gray—Jeremy Davy

Partner appointed as head of residential conveyancing for England

DR Solicitors—Paul Edels

DR Solicitors—Paul Edels

Specialist firm enhances corporate healthcare practice with partner appointment

NEWS
The proposed £11bn redress scheme following the Supreme Court’s motor finance rulings is analysed in this week’s NLJ by Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
Writing in NLJ this week, James Harrison and Jenna Coad of Penningtons Manches Cooper chart the Privy Council’s demolition of the long-standing ‘shareholder rule’ in Jardine Strategic v Oasis Investments
back-to-top-scroll