Land

Ambercrown Ltd v Alexandra Perrett & Anor (LANDLORD AND TENANT - SERVICE CHARGES - consultation - whether consultation took place)

[2024] UKUT LC 158Upper Tribunal (Lands)2024

“LANDLORD AND TENANT - SERVICE CHARGES - consultation - whether consultation took place - whether work done was within the scope of the consultation - the duty of the First-tier Tribunal to explain it…”

Read the full brief — free

You're reading the free summary of Ambercrown Ltd v Alexandra Perrett & Anor (LANDLORD AND TENANT - SERVICE CHARGES - consultation - whether consultation took place). Create a free account to unlock the full reasoning, the cited authorities and the verbatim judgment — plus structured briefs for 412,000+ UK judgments.

Create free account Already have one? Sign in

No card required. Free forever.

Read the full judgment elsewhere

Multiple official and mirror sources — pick whichever loads cleanly on your network.

More Land cases

Jamieson v London & Quadrant Housing Trust (LANDLORD AND TENANT - SERVICE CHARGES - orders under s.20C of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 and para. 5A of Schedule 11 to the Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act 2002 - FTT's reasoning)

[2026] UKUT LC 103

214 Bermondsey Street Ltd v Corfe (LANDLORD AND TENANT - SERVICE CHARGES - evidence)

[2026] UKUT LC 96

Okoye v Zachariah & Anor (HOUSING - RENT REPAYMENT ORDER - selective licensing - flat belonging to appellant's wife let by agent in appellant's name without obtaining licence)

[2026] UKUT LC 155

Compare the Market Ltd v Giles (VO) (RATING - valuation - alteration of 2017 rating list - hereditament comprising two separate office buildings)

[2026] UKUT LC 77

Dobson & Anor v Unsted & Anor (LAND REGISTRATION - ADVERSE POSSESSION - evidence - acts of possession)

[2026] UKUT LC 93

Vernon v Orbit Housing Association (LANDLORD AND TENANT - SERVICE CHARGES - issue estoppel - evidence)

This case is reproduced verbatim from the public judgment published by The National Archives under the UK Government's Open Government Licence v3.0. If you appear in this case and believe it should not be published — for example because your conviction was quashed on appeal, you have statutory anonymity, or for other privacy reasons — request removal here.