Eyre & Ors v McCracken [2000] EWCA Civ 501 (10 March 2000)

Eyre & Ors v McCracken [2000] EWCA Civ 501 (10 March 2000)

The tenant's repairing covenant did not require the insertion of a damp-proof course and ancillary works, as this would amount to giving back a different property than was demised, constituting an improvement rather than a repair. The absence of a damp-proof course was an original design feature, and the tenant's obligation was limited to repair, not to improvement.

Citation
[2000] EWCA Civ 501
Parties
Respondent/claimant: Charles George Samuel Eyre; Respondent/claimant: James Henry Robert Eyre; Respondent/claimant: Peter Lomas; Respondent/claimant: Hugh John Lomas; Appellant/defendant: Robert McCracken
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
10 March 2000
Procedural Posture
Appeal (civil) / Court of Appeal Judgment
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Repairing Covenants, Lease Interpretation, Landlord and Tenant Obligations, Improvements Vs Repairs
Landlord and Tenant Property Law Repairing Covenants Lease Interpretation Landlord and Tenant Obligations Improvements Vs Repairs

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Charles George Samuel Eyre

Respondent/claimant

James Henry Robert Eyre

Respondent/claimant

Peter Lomas

Respondent/claimant

Hugh John Lomas

Respondent/claimant

Robert McCracken

Appellant/defendant

Procedural Posture

Appeal (civil) / Court of Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the tenant's repairing covenant requires the insertion of a damp-proof course and ancillary works in a Victorian house with no original damp-proof course.

Ratio Decidendi

The tenant's repairing covenant did not require the insertion of a damp-proof course and ancillary works, as this would amount to giving back a different property than was demised, constituting an improvement rather than a repair. The absence of a damp-proof course was an original design feature, and the tenant's obligation was limited to repair, not to improvement.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Order for possession and repairs set aside to the extent of the disputed damp-proofing works
  • Appellant awarded costs of the appeal