000			01533cab a2200229 4500
001			##L135116
008			060925n2006 000 0 eng u
035			_a(Sirsi) u135116
041	0		_aeng
100	1		_aFancourt, Timothy
245	0	0	_aProperty law update
260			_c2006
490		0	_aNew Law Journal _v156(7233) 14 July 2006, 1132-1133(2)
520			_aReports on two significant Lands Tribunal decisions which consider and clarify the basis on which a LVT enquires into the reasonableness of residential service charges: "Schilling and Schilling and others v Canary Riverside Development Pte Limited and others" (LRX/26/2005, L135111) and "Canary Riverside Pte Limited and others v Schilling and Schilling and others" (LRX/65/2005, L135107). The first case raised the issues concerning the burden of proof applied by the LVT in respect of the reasonableness of the service charge expenditure and whether the LVT has jurisdiction at all to decide service charge matters. The second case concerned whether a landlord could add to the service charge its litigation costs against some or all tenants who pay the service charges.
650	2	4	_aCOMMONHOLD AND LEASEHOLD REFORM ACT 2002
650	2	4	_aSTAGHOLD V TAKEDA
650	2	4	_aSCHILLING V CANARY RIVERSIDE DEVELOPMENT
650	2	4	_aCANARY RIVERSIDE DEVELOPMENT V SCHILLING
651		4	_aEngland and Wales _y1543-
690			_aPROPERTY-RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY-LEASEHOLD RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY-RESIDENTIAL LANDLORD AND TENANT-RESIDENTIAL SERVICE CHARGES
942			_n0
999			_c77785 _d77785