Cases - Elmcroft Developments Ltd v Tankersley-Sawyer
Record details
- Name
- Elmcroft Developments Ltd v Tankersley-Sawyer
- Date
- (1984)
- Citation
- 270 EG 140, CA
- Legislation
- Keywords
- Commercial property - property management - dilapidations - damp proof course - obligation to repair
- Summary
-
Damp/damp-proof courses - It will not always be the case that just because there is no damp-proof course in place already there is no obligation to install one. One must consider whether the presence of damp has caused disrepair (in Post Office v Aquarius Properties Ltd it did not). Just because a property or part of it is damp does not mean that there is disrepair. If there is damp which causes disrepair, then if it is not realistic to repair the damp affected part of the property without also curing the design defect, then the installation of a damp-proof course could be within the obligation to repair.
The basement flat suffered from severe damp that damaged the plaster on the walls. The landlord contended that it was sufficient for patching up repairs to be undertaken whenever the plaster was in such a condition that work was required. The problem could have been resolved once and for all by the insertion of a damp-proof course. The court concluded that the landlord’s obligation required it to install the damp-proof course so that the problem was resolved once and for all and the landlord did not have to repetitively carry out what would be futile work.