Cases - Proudfoot v Hart

Record details

Name

Proudfoot v Hart

Date

[1890]

Citation

LR 25 QBD 42, CA

Keywords

Commercial property - property management - dilapidations - tenantable repair - dilapidations case law

Summary

'"Good tenantable repair" is such repair as having regard to the age, character and locality of the [property] as would make [it] reasonably fit for the occupation of a reasonably minded tenant of the class who would be likely to take [it] ... [the property] need not be put into the same condition as when the tenant took [it], [it] need not be put in perfect repair.'

' ... to keep a house in good tenantable repair the tenants' obligation is to put and keep the premises in such repair as having regard to the age, character and locality of the house, would make it reasonably fit for the occupation of a tenant of the class who would be likely to take it. The age of the house must be taken into account, because nobody could reasonably expect that a house 200 years' old should be in the same condition of repair as a house lately built.'

One of the judges illustrated the issue by explaining that the repairs necessary to a palace would not be the same as those necessary for a cottage or that repairs to a house in Grosvenor Square would not be the same as those for a house in Spitalfields. (Ironically a comparison between houses in Grosvenor Square and Spitalfields, that seemed appropriate in 1890, would now probably not be made because there has been significant redevelopment in that area and while there are still differences between them, the difference is no longer so stark.)