Grand v Gill

Grand v Gill

Plasterwork on internal walls and ceilings forms part of the structure of the premises for which the landlord is responsible under repairing covenants. The judge erred in discounting damages for damp and mould by 90% as Mr Gill was fully liable for the plasterwork disrepair. Damages should be increased accordingly, and interest should be awarded from 1 December 2007 at 2%.

Parties
Appellant: Tanya Grand; Respondent: Param Gill
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
19 May 2011
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Central London County Court to Court of Appeal
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part
Legal Topics
Repairing Obligations, Damages Assessment, Interest on Damages, Costs, Structure of Premises

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 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Tanya Grand

Appellant

Param Gill

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Central London County Court to Court of Appeal

  1. 1 Whether internal plasterwork forms part of the 'structure' for which the landlord is responsible under repairing covenants
  2. 2 Whether the judge erred in discounting damages for damp and mould by 90%
  3. 3 Whether interest should have been awarded on damages

Ratio Decidendi

Plasterwork on internal walls and ceilings forms part of the structure of the premises for which the landlord is responsible under repairing covenants. The judge erred in discounting damages for damp and mould by 90% as Mr Gill was fully liable for the plasterwork disrepair. Damages should be increased accordingly, and interest should be awarded from 1 December 2007 at 2%.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part

Orders

  • Damages increased from £5,600 to £6,275 in favour of Ms Grand
  • Interest at 2% awarded on damages from 1 December 2007 to 7 May 2009