Not to commit waste : ancient common law duty, not to positively damage the property. o Waste may be defined as an act or omission which alters the state of the land . o Divided into 3 categories : o (a) ameliorating waste —changes which improve the land . o (b) voluntary waste –doing something which should not be done (eg knocking down a wall) . o (c) permissive waste —leaving undone something which ought to be done (eg allowing a wall to fall into disrepair). o The extent of liability for waste depends on the type of lease involved . o Eg a weekly tenant is liable for voluntary waste but not permissive waste (they may not knock down a wall; but can let it fall down). 9
Landlord’s implied covenants Tenant’s quiet enjoyment of the premises: In the absence of an express obligation ,this covenant will be implied into the lease ( Markham v Paget (1908)). Perera v Vandiyar (1953) Landlord cut off gas and electricity = breach of quiet enjoyment Protection from Eviction Act (1977) : Under that act, unlawful eviction or harassment (of residential tenants) is a criminal offence; so you could sue, or could contact police . Can sue for damages for unlawful eviction under Housing Act 1988, ss27-28. Non-derogation from Grant (not to derogate from his/her grant) A landlord cannot seek to take away with one hand what they have given with the other. Derogation from grant can overlap with breach of covenant for quiet enjoyment ; but there may be a breach of the former where there is no breach of the latter, eg the landlord must not let adjoining premises for a use which may adversely affect the purposes for which the premises have been let. i.e. if he lets the property to you for a specific purpose, must not do anything which would interfere with the letting for that purpose . Harmer v Jumbil (Nigeria) Tin Areas (1921) Aldon v Latimer Clark (!984) : landlord let property to tenant for the purpose of drying timber; but landlord obstructed the flow of air which was necessary for the drying of the timber. HELD: derogation from grant Oceanic Village v Shirayama (2001): The landlord let a unit in the London Aquarium for the tenant to be the London Aquarium gift shop ; he covenant not to allow any other gift shop in the building; landlord set up own gift shop outside the building. HELD: not a breach of covenant not to allow, because it was outside the building. BUT HELD: breach of covenant not to derogate from the grant , because he had let it to the tenant to be THE gift shop, and then set up another gift shop. Repair? General rule: NO IMPLIED covenant to repair at common law : you take the property as you find it . Exceptions : (1) Furnished premises at time of letting : if landlord lets a furnished property, implied covenant that the property will be fit for human habitation at date of letting, and if not can refuse to take the property.
You've reached the end of your free preview.
Want to read all 15 pages?
- Fall '19
- Law, Leasehold estate, LTA