DFR Properties Ltd v. Glen House Properties & Anor [2006] ScotCS CSIH_48 (10 October 2006)

DFR Properties Ltd v. Glen House Properties & Anor [2006] ScotCS CSIH_48 (10 October 2006)

The Minute of Agreement was silent on responsibility for fair wear and tear and tenantability; it was necessary to imply a term obliging the owner to maintain the flats in tenantable condition to give business efficacy to the contract. The sheriff was entitled to find such an implied term, and the appellants' failure to maintain the flats constituted a material breach. The sheriff's broad-brush approach to damages was justified on the evidence. The pleadings, as amended, supported the awards made.

Citation
[2006] ScotCS CSIH_48
Parties
Pursuers and Appellants: D. F. R. Properties Limited; Defenders and Respondents: Glen House Properties; Defender and Respondent: Robert Sim Dunlop; Defender and Respondent: Mrs. Hilary Jennifer Susan Dunlop
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
10 October 2006
Procedural Posture
Appeal (from Sheriff Court) / Judgment on Appeal and Cross Appeal
Outcome
Appeal refused; cross-appeal refused; sheriff's interlocutor adhered to as amended; amendment to pleadings allowed.
Legal Topics
Implied Terms, Breach of Contract, Damages, Holiday Letting Agreements, Interpretation of Contracts
Contract Law Property Law Implied Terms Breach of Contract Damages Holiday Letting Agreements Interpretation of Contracts

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 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

D. F. R. Properties Limited

Pursuers and Appellants

Glen House Properties

Defenders and Respondents

Robert Sim Dunlop

Defender and Respondent

Mrs. Hilary Jennifer Susan Dunlop

Defender and Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal (from Sheriff Court) / Judgment on Appeal and Cross Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether an implied term existed obliging the owner to maintain flats in tenantable condition or equivalent to the original standard; whether the owner was in material breach of such an implied term; whether the sheriff erred in awarding damages to either party; whether the pleadings supported the awards made.

Ratio Decidendi

The Minute of Agreement was silent on responsibility for fair wear and tear and tenantability; it was necessary to imply a term obliging the owner to maintain the flats in tenantable condition to give business efficacy to the contract. The sheriff was entitled to find such an implied term, and the appellants' failure to maintain the flats constituted a material breach. The sheriff's broad-brush approach to damages was justified on the evidence. The pleadings, as amended, supported the awards made.

Court Disposition

Appeal refused; cross-appeal refused; sheriff's interlocutor adhered to as amended; amendment to pleadings allowed.

Orders

  • Appellants' appeal refused.
  • Respondents' cross-appeal refused.