Search

How can we help?

Icon

Tenant wins challenge against Landlord’s ‘conclusive’ service charge statement

In the recent case of  Sara & Hossein Asset Holdings Ltd v Blacks Outdoor Retail Ltd [2020] EWHC 1263 (Ch), the High Court held that a tenant could challenge the service charge sums due under their lease, despite a clause in their lease stating that the landlord’s service charge certificate was ‘conclusive’ save for absent manifest or mathematical error or fraud.

Blacks Outdoor Retail Ltd (Blacks) was the tenant of commercial premises at Chicago Buildings, Whitechapel and Stanley Street.  Their landlord – Sara & Hossein Asset Holdings Ltd (S&HAH Ltd) instigated proceedings against them for non-payment of service charge over the previous two years.  The service charge amounted to £55,000 in the first year and £400,000 in the second year.  S&HAH Ltd asserted that they had produced a certificate in respect of such sums and that in accordance with the terms of the lease, such certificate was ‘conclusive’.  However, Blacks argued that the costs S&HAH Ltd were seeking to recover were in respect of modernisation and improvement works and as such were not recoverable as service charge, as they did not fall within the landlord’s repairing obligations under the lease.

The High Court found in favour of Blacks and held that, the service charge certificate was conclusive as to the amount of the service charge, but was not conclusive as to whether those costs actually fell within the scope of the service charge payable by the tenant under the lease.  Accordingly the tenant was entitled to challenge the service charge costs.

Landlords should carefully consider whether the sums they are seeking to recover actually fall within the service charge provisions of their lease

While this case turned on the specific wording of Black’s lease, it nonetheless provides a useful reminder that a clause purporting that a service charge certificate is ‘conclusive’ will not be conclusive where those sums were never properly due.  Landlords should carefully consider whether the sums they are seeking to recover actually fall within the service charge provisions of their lease, particularly in respect of improvement and modernisation works.  Similarly, tenants should scrutinise any certificates/demands for payment so that they only pay what is due under their lease.

Disclaimer
This information is for guidance purposes only and should not be regarded as a substitute for taking legal advice. Please refer to the full General Notices on our website.

Author profile

About this article

Read, listen and watch our latest insights

Pub
  • 09 July 2026
  • Litigation and dispute resolution

The Arbitration Act 2025 – Factsheet

This factsheet outlines the major reforms and key developments introduced by the Arbitration Act 2025, including updates on summary disposal, jurisdictional challenges, emergency arbitrators, arbitrator disclosure duties, and governing law in arbitration proceedings.

art
  • 09 July 2026
  • Immigration

Right to Work Checks are changing from 1 October 2026: Is your business ready?

The Home Office’s new rules, effective 1 October 2026, will overhaul right to work checks and raise the risk of civil penalties for UK businesses.

art
  • 08 July 2026
  • Privacy and Data Protection

ICO prosecutes employee under the Data Protection Act for forwarding client data to his personal email address

The issue of employees taking confidential business information or personal data when moving to a new employer remains a significant concern for businesses.

Pub
  • 07 July 2026
  • Litigation and dispute resolution

Accelerating arbitration: Expedited procedures and key changes in the new ICC Rules – Episode 2

In episode 2, Jack Hobbs (Clarkslegal) and Christopher Howitt (Three Stone) explore how the latest expedited and highly expedited procedures under the ICC Arbitration Rules 2026 are transforming the landscape of dispute resolution.

art
  • 07 July 2026
  • Employment

6 month unfair dismissal rights: What employers need to know

Under the new Employment Rights Act 2025 the minimum period of service required to qualify to bring a statutory claim for unfair dismissal has been reduced from 2 full years to 6 months from 1 January 2027 onwards.  

art
  • 02 July 2026
  • Litigation and dispute resolution

Litigation and Artificial Intelligence: Where are we now?

In the recent case of Cork and another v Smith, the High Court publicly admonished a law firm and two of its solicitors after they had produced and submitted two AI-generated letters to the court containing misleading and false information in relation to a block transfer application made under Rule 12.37 of the Insolvency (England and Wales) Rules 2016.