Could I have one final question please and ask you to read the whole paragraph and confirm that my understanding is still correct:
So often as reasonably required to decorate the exterior of the Building in such a manner as shall be agreed by the majority of the tenants of the flats or failing agreement in the manner in which they were previously decorated or as near thereto as circumstances permit and in particular (but without prejudice to the generality of this covenant) will paint the exterior parts of the Building usually painted with two coats at least of good quality paint at least once in every four years.
Yep, that does change things. I read that as meaning that the majority can decide how the exterior should be redecorated, not whether or not it should be redecorated. Even so, I think it's extremely unlikely that a judge would have any sympathy for a lessee who is objecting to the building being redecorated at someone else's expenses, particularly when it would need doing if it hasn't been painted for 20 years.
Yep, that does change things. I read that as meaning that the majority can decide how the exterior should be redecorated, not whether or not it should be redecorated. Even so, I think it's extremely unlikely that a judge would have any sympathy for a lessee who is objecting to the building being redecorated at someone else's expenses, particularly when it would need doing if it hasn't been painted for 20 years.