Housing : being the annotated texts of The Housing Act, 1957 and the Housing (Financial Provisions) Act, 1958 / by J.D. James.

  • Great Britain
Date:
1958
Catalogue details

Licence: Public Domain Mark

Credit: Housing : being the annotated texts of The Housing Act, 1957 and the Housing (Financial Provisions) Act, 1958 / by J.D. James. Source: Wellcome Collection.

    72/596 (page 44)
    No. 109.—HOUSING Provided that the condition and undertaking aforesaid shall not be implied when a house is let for a term of not less than three years upon the terms that it be put by the lessee into a condition reasonably fit for human habitation, and the lease is not determinable at the option of either party before the expiration of three years. (3) The landlord, or any person authorised by him in writing, may at reasonable times of the day, on giving twenty-four hours’ notice in writing to the tenant or occupier, enter any premises to which this section applies for the purpose of viewing the state and condition thereof. : (4) In this section the expression “landlord ’’ means any person who lets for human habitation to a tenant any house under any contract referred to in this section, and includes his successors in title, and the expression “house ”’ includes part of a house. NOTES History. This section contains provisions formerly in s. 2 of the Housing Act, 1936, as amended by s. 54 (4) of, and the Fifth Schedule to, the Housing Repairs and Rents Act, 1954, and by s. 26 (1) of, and para. 22 of the Sixth Schedule to, the Rent Act, 1957- General Note. This section introduces, into contracts for the letting of certain small houses for human habitation, a statutory implied term. The term so implied is two-fold: (1) it is made a condition that the house is fit for habitation at the commence- ment of the tenancy, and (2) there is an undertaking by the landlord that he will keep the house fit for habitation during the tenancy; see sub-s. (2), supra. The “‘ small ’’ houses to which this section applies are those mentioned in sub-s. (1), supra, and the applicability of the section depends on (1) when the contract of tenancy was made, (2) where the house is situate, and (3) the rent at which it is let. Note also: the exception in sub-s. (2), proviso, supra. For the extension of this section to certain agricultural workers, who have a contract of employment but no contract of tenancy, see S. 7, post. At common law there is no implied condition warranty or undertaking, on the letting of an unfurnished house, as to its fitness for habitation; see Hart v. Windsor (1844), 12 M. & W. 68; 31 Digest (Repl.) 133, 2716; Bartram v. Aldous (1886), 2 T.L.R. 237; 31 Digest (Repl.) 192, 3224; and Lane v. Cox, [1897] 1 QO.B. 415, C.A.; 31 Digest (Repl.) 195, 3261. Cf. also, in the case of an unfurnished flat, Cruse v. Mount, [1933] Ch. 278; 31 Digest (Repl.) 195, 3263. The intending tenant is presumed to make his own inquiries as to the condition of the house and, in the absence of special stipulation, he takes the house as it stands; see Chappell v. Gregory (1863), 34 Beav. 250; 31 Digest (Repl.) 194, 3258. This common law rule does not apply to furnished lettings, where a condition or warranty as to fitness for occupation at the commencement of the tenancy may be implied from the circumstances; see Smith v. Marrable (1843), 11 M. & W. 5; 31 Digest (Repl.) 195, 3266. A number of cases decided on the earlier Acts are thought to be still of importance. Note, however, that the Housing Repairs and Rents Act, 1954, made two changes which may affect the construction of the present section; first, it removed (from s. 2 of the Act of 1936) the words “in all respects reasonably ’’ before the words “‘ fit for human habitation ’’ in what is now sub-s. (2), supva; and secondly it provided the list of matters to be given consideration in deciding whether a house is unfit, now to be found in s. 4, ante. These changes appear to render the reference in s. 147 (2) of the Law of Property Act, 1925 (20 Halsbury’s Statutes (2nd Edn.) 750), to “ any statutory liability to keep a house in all respects reasonably fit for human habitation ”’ no longer applicable to the liability under this section. The changes might be construed as affecting to some extent the matters relied on in Summers v. Salford Corporation, [1943] 1 All E.R. 68, H.L.; 31 Digest (Repl.) 198, 3305. The cases of Morgan v. Liverpool Corporation, [1927] 2 K.B. 131, C.A.; 31 Digest (Repl.) 198, 3307, and McCarrick v. Liverpool Corporation, [1946] 2 All E.R. 646; [1947] A.C. 219; 31 Digest (Repl.) 198, 3308, establish that the statutory implied undertaking to keep the house fit is subject to a further implied term that liability for breach does not arise unless the landlord has had notice of the defects. If the defect is latent, however, the landlord may be liable without notice; see Fisher v. Walters, [1926] 2 K.B. 315; 31 Digest (Repl.) 198, 3306, doubted in McCarrick’s case, supra. Subject to these cases, when there is a breach the tenant can sue the landlord for damages, as well as abandon the tenancy; see Walker v. Hobbs & Co. (1889), 23 Q.B.D. 458; 31 Digest (Repl.) 198, 3304. Strangers to the contract cannot sue thereon (Cavalier v. Pope, [1906] A.C. 428; 31 Digest (Repl.) 386, 5124; Cameron v. Young, [1908] A.C. 176; 31 Digest (Repl.) 386, 5125; Middleton v. Hall (1912), 108 L.T. 804; 31 Digest (Repl.) 387, 5127; Ryall v. Kidwell & Son, [1914] 3 K.B. 135, C.A.; 31 Digest (Repl.) 387, 5128); see, however, the Occupiers’ Liability Act, 1957, s. 4 (104 Statutes Supp. 86; 37 Halsbury’s Statutes (2nd Edn.) 837), extending the ordinary occupier’s liability to certain landlords.