UK: Daejan Investments Limited – v – Benson & Others

Last Updated: 12 April 2013
Article by Peter Levaggi and Emma Humphreys

On 6 March 2013, The Supreme Court handed down Judgment in the case of Daejan Investments Limited -v- Benson & Others [2013 UKSC 14] (on appeal from The Court of Appeal). The outcome of this appeal has been much anticipated by those working in the residential property management field.


Pursuant to Section 20 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 ("the Act") a landlord is required to consult with lessees prior to undertaking "qualifying works". The procedure is as prescribed by the Service Charges (Consultation Requirements) (England) Regulations 2003, with similar regulations applying in Wales. Should a landlord fail to comply with the consultation process, the relevant contributions of the lessees can be capped (currently at £250 per lessee).

Qualifying Works are defined as works which are "works on the building or any other premises" and include therefore works of repair, maintenance or improvement. By way of background, during 2005, the landlord (Daejan Investments Limited) ("Daejan") indicated to lessees of property at Queens Mansions that major works were required to the building. The lessees were all members of the Queens Mansions Residents Association ("QRMA").

Daejan obtained and sent to QRMA a specification of proposed works. Following a request by QRMA, Robert Edward Associates (who had previously been advising QRMA on the proposed works) were approached to provide a further specification for the proposed works.

A Notice of Intention was sent out to the lessees on 6 July 2005 following which the specification from Robert Edward Associates was received and utilised by QRMA to make observations on the proposed works.

The Stage 2 process of consultation was then commenced and Daejan obtained estimates for the proposed works. Robert Edward Associates reported to QRMA on the tenders.

The most competitive tender appeared to be that of a company called Rosewood Building Contractors followed by a tender from Mitre Construction Limited (Daejan's preferred contractor).

Notices were served on the lessees on 14 June 2006 purportedly in compliance with the ongoing consultation process, but these Notices did not include the Rosewood tender (albeit QRMA commented and provided observations on the Notices stating however that the points made were provisional until all priced tenders had been seen).

Daejan then served amended Notices including all estimates obtained. These Notices were served on 28 July 2006 and the lessees/QRMA had until 31 August 2006 to provide their comments and observations.

However, on 8 August 2006 QRMA were informed that the contract had been placed with Mitre. As such, the assumption was that there was no point in the lessees/QRMA providing further comments or observations as the contract had been placed and the consultation process had therefore been curtailed.

It subsequently transpired that the contract with Mitre was in fact not placed until 11 September 2006.

QRMA brought proceedings in the LVT on 14 July 2006 for a determination that the consultation process had not been complied with and that the cost of the works was not reasonable.

The LVT found that Daejan had not complied with Section 20, in that the Notices of Estimates did not contain a summary of observations received and further, the estimates were not available for inspection as set out on the Notices.

The LVT then considered an application by Daejan as to whether the consultation requirements should be dispensed with. The LVT determined in favour of the lessees and did not dispense with the consultation requirements. On the basis of this decision, Daejan were limited to recovering £250 per lessee for the major works, thus resulting in Dajean being unable to recover a substantial sum expended on the major works (some £278,750).

Daejan appealed to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber), who rejected the appeal but did indicate that it considered the failure of Daejan (to include within its Notices of Estimates a summary of observations), to be a relatively minor breach which caused no prejudice to the lessees.

The Upper Tribunal did not agree with the LVT determination that the lessees had suffered consequential prejudice as a result of the consultation process effectively being curtailed albeit it did agree that the process had been prematurely curtailed.

Daejan were given permission to appeal to the Court of Appeal, who dismissed the appeal. The Court of Appeal Judgment concentrated on 3 points:-

  • The financial effect of dispensation on the landlord and tenant was irrelevant when deciding whether to grant dispensation;
  • The LVT had not erred in treating Dajean more harshly than if it had been a leaseholder owned landlord; and
  • Significant prejudice to the tenants is of primary importance when deciding whether to grant dispensation.

The Court of Appeal found that Daejan's failures on consultation had been serious and had caused the tenants serious prejudice.

However, Daejan was granted permission to appeal to The Supreme Court.

Supreme Court Judgment

Lord Neuberger determined that the Supreme Court had three questions to consider:-

(i) "The proper approach to be adopted on an application under Section 20ZA (1) to dispense with compliance with the requirements;

(ii) Whether the decision on such an application must be binary, or whether the LVT can grant a section 20 (1) (b) dispensation on terms;

(iii) The approach to be adopted when prejudice is alleged by tenants owing to the landlord's failure to comply with requirements."

On the first point, there is a link between Section 19 and Section 20ZA, in that they are intended to ensure that tenants of flats are not required to pay for unnecessary services which are provided to a defective standard or to pay more for services which are provided to an acceptable standard and are necessary.

On this basis, when the LVT determine whether to grant dispensation it should consider to what extent the tenants were prejudiced, if at all, by the landlord's failure to comply with consultation requirements.

The Judgment further indicated that neither the financial consequence to the landlord nor the identity of the landlord were relevant factors.

On the second point, the Judgment indicates that when deciding whether to grant dispensation it is not simply a case of dispensing or not dispending with the requirement to consult - the LVT has the power to grant dispensation on certain terms. Examples of conditions could be that dispensation could be granted if the landlord reduced the cost of the works to be put through the service charges or, the landlord paid the tenants' costs of the Section 20ZA application.

On the third point, the lessees would be required to identify prejudice that they have suffered as a result of the failure of the landlord to consult. Therefore, if a lessee indicated that had they been provided with an opportunity of nominating a contractor, they would have nominated Contractor A (who would have been cheaper than the contractor appointed), the LVT would be reasonable in making the assumption that the landlord would have appointed Contractor A and, as such, conclude that the tenant had suffered loss. The LVT could then either refuse to dispense with the consultation requirements or, alternatively, dispense with the requirement on condition that the sum recoverable from the landlord would be limited to the sum which would have been expended had Contractor A been nominated, In this way, the tenant does not achieve a windfall and only be liable for £250 towards what could be substantial works but that their position is restored to that which it is to be assumed it would have been had the landlord complied with consultation.

Having considered in depth the principal points, Lord Neuberger found that the tenants/QRMA had not suffered any relevant prejudice as a result of Daejan's failure to comply with the consultation requirements. They had been aware of the estimates, had had their own contractor produce a specification and had provided comments and observations which were unlikely to have been added to had the consultation process completed. Lord Clarke and Lord Sumption agreed but Lord Hope and Lord Wilson dissented.

The previous determinations/orders were set aside and dispensation granted to Daejan. As a result of The Supreme Court Judgment, it is likely that more landlords will be successful in obtaining dispensation from compliance with the consultation requirements albeit, in that event, with appropriate conditions attached. Landlords should however continue to consult as there will be many cases where dispensation will not be granted.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Emma Humphreys
In association with
Related Topics
Related Articles
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Worldwide Updates
Registration (you must scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of

To Use you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.


The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.


Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions