However, our insurers now tell us that this does not apply to personal injury claims made by a tenant or other person likely to be affected by the disrepair. Apparently, it is sufficient for the injured party to show that the defect was one that we ought to have known about. Is this correct?
Q As landlords of a large number of commercial and residential properties, we always understood that, in so far as we are obliged to repair the demised premises, no liability attaches until we get to know of the defect in question.
However, our insurers now tell us that this does not apply to personal injury claims made by a tenant or other person likely to be affected by the disrepair. Apparently, it is sufficient for the injured party to show that the defect was one that we ought to have known about. Is this correct?
A Yes. The advice was presumably based upon section 4 of the Defective Premises Act 1972, as recently interpreted by the Court of Appeal in Sykes v Harry [2001] 17 EG 221. A fuller explanation may be found in John Murdoch’s Liability around the house Estates Gazette 2 June 2001, p55.
