Leases and underleases - Repair obligations

Learning Outcomes

This article explores the key principles governing repair obligations in leases and underleases. For the SQE1 assessments, you will need to understand the difference between landlord and tenant responsibilities for repairs, how these are defined by statute (particularly the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985) and common law, and the implications of express covenants within lease agreements. Your understanding of these areas will enable you to identify the correct legal position and advise clients effectively in SQE1-style single best answer questions. You should also be able to explain the standard of repair required, distinguish “repair” from “renewal” or “improvement,” appreciate how obligations differ in leases of whole versus part, and apply remedies and statutory limits (including s.18 LTA 1927 and the Leasehold Property (Repairs) Act 1938). In residential contexts, be able to apply s.11 LTA 1985 and the implied covenant of fitness for human habitation (s.9A LTA 1985), including the role of notice and landlord control of common parts.

SQE1 Syllabus

For SQE1, you are required to understand repair obligations in leases and underleases, with a focus on the following syllabus points:

• Landlord's statutory repairing obligations under s.11 Landlord and Tenant Act 1985.
• Tenant's implied and express repairing covenants, including the standard of repair.
• Common types of repair covenants (absolute, qualified, fully qualified).
• The structure and implications of Full Repairing and Insuring (FRI) leases.
• Remedies available for breach of repairing covenants, including damages, specific performance, forfeiture, and self-help (Jervis v Harris clauses).
• Statutory limitations on damages for disrepair (s.18 Landlord and Tenant Act 1927).
• The Leasehold Property (Repairs) Act 1938: scope, procedure, and impact on enforcement.
• Distinguishing repair from renewal/improvement; pre-existing defects and insured risks.
• s.9A LTA 1985 (Homes (Fitness for Human Habitation) Act 2018) implied covenant in residential tenancies.
• Practical drafting and negotiation points: schedules of condition, exclusions for fair wear and tear and insured risks, and yield-up obligations.

Test Your Knowledge

Attempt these questions before reading this article. If you find some difficult or cannot remember the answers, remember to look more closely at that area during your revision.

1. Under which section of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 are repairing obligations implied into short residential leases?
   1. Section 8
   2. Section 11
   3. Section 18
   4. Section 25
2. Which common law case established the principle that a tenant must use premises in a 'tenant-like manner'?
   1. Proudfoot v Hart
   2. Street v Mountford
   3. Warren v Keen
   4. Jervis v Harris
3. A tenant has a covenant 'to keep the premises in good repair'. The premises were in poor condition at the start of the lease. What is the tenant's obligation?
   1. To return the premises in the same condition as at the start.
   2. To carry out only minor maintenance tasks.
   3. To put the premises into good repair, even if that improves them.
   4. To repair only damage caused by the tenant.

Introduction

Repair obligations are a frequent source of disputes between landlords and tenants. Understanding who is responsible for repairs is important in property practice. These obligations derive from a combination of express terms within the lease agreement, implied terms at common law, and statutory duties imposed by Parliament. For SQE1, you must be able to identify the source and extent of repairing obligations in various scenarios, particularly concerning both residential and commercial leases, and understand the consequences of breaching these obligations. This article outlines the key legal principles and common lease provisions governing repairs.

In practice, the starting point is always the lease wording. Parties often negotiate the repair clause intensively to allocate cost and risk. Commercial landlords typically seek “clear rent” with minimal outgoings, often via FRI structures. Tenants, by contrast, aim to cap exposure by excluding liability for fair wear and tear and insured risks, carving out pre-existing defects and historic contamination, and anchoring obligations to a schedule of condition. In residential leases of dwellings for less than seven years, statutory obligations (especially s.11 LTA 1985) imply non-excludable duties on the landlord. The interplay between repair duties and insurance, service charge regimes, and limitations on damages is central in advising both landlords and tenants.

Key Term: Repair Covenant
An express clause within a lease agreement that sets out the specific obligations of the landlord and/or tenant regarding the repair and maintenance of the leased property.

Sources of Repair Obligations

The responsibility for repairs in a leasehold property can arise from several sources. It is essential to determine which party bears the responsibility for specific types of repair based on the lease agreement and applicable law.

Express Covenants

Most modern leases contain express covenants detailing the repairing obligations of both the landlord and the tenant. These clauses explicitly state which party is responsible for maintaining different parts of the property (e.g., structure, exterior, interior, common parts). The precise drafting is critical. Covenants may be:

• Absolute: unconditional obligations to repair, without qualification.
• Qualified: obligations limited by carve-outs (for example, excluding fair wear and tear, pre-existing defects, or damage caused by insured risks).
• Fully qualified: obligations subject to satisfaction of conditions or procedures (for example, repair “to the satisfaction of the landlord’s surveyor, acting reasonably,” or “maintain in the condition evidenced by the schedule of condition”).

Courts approach the phrasing with established principles. A covenant “to repair” means maintaining in the state a reasonably minded owner would keep it, considering the property’s age, character, and locality, and what would make it reasonably fit for occupation by a tenant of the likely class (Proudfoot v Hart (1890)). A covenant “to keep in repair” is more onerous: it includes putting the property into repair if it is already in disrepair at the outset, even where that requires improvement or renewal to achieve the requisite state (see Ravenseft Properties Ltd v Davstone (Holdings) Ltd [1980] and Elite Investments v TI Bainbridge).

“Good condition” can impose a higher threshold than mere “repair,” potentially requiring works even absent disrepair if the condition falls short of “good.” Drafting should be scrutinised to avoid inadvertently expanding obligations beyond the parties’ intentions. Tenants commonly seek to:

• Avoid “put into repair,” preferring “maintain.”
• Exclude fair wear and tear and pre-existing defects.
• Exclude damage caused by insured risks (to avoid paying twice: once for insurance and again for repair).
• Limit obligations by reference to a schedule of condition.

Key Term: Schedule of Condition
A document (often prepared by a surveyor with photographs) recording the property’s state at lease commencement, used to cap the tenant’s obligations (e.g., “maintain in the condition evidenced by the Schedule of Condition”).

Key Term: Insured Risk
A risk (such as fire, flood, storm) against which the landlord or tenant is obliged to insure under the lease. Damage caused by insured risks is often carved out from the tenant’s repair covenant, with reinstatement managed under the lease’s insurance provisions and rent suspension mechanisms.

Leases should also address redecoration cycles (e.g., every five years and in the final year) and “yield up” obligations at term end, ensuring the tenant returns the property in the condition required by the repair covenant. The lease should define the premises carefully: in a lease of whole, the tenant may take responsibility for structure and exterior; in a lease of part, the tenant’s repairing obligation customarily covers the interior only, with the structure, exterior, and common parts excluded and maintained by the landlord, often recovered via a service charge. Even so, a lease of part may be effectively full repairing where service charge picks up structural repairs.

Underleases should be checked against the headlease. An undertenant’s repairing obligations must not exceed those of the tenant under the headlease in a way that prevents compliance with headlease obligations or risks inconsistent liabilities. Head landlords often require approval of underlease terms and insist that underleases replicate relevant repair provisions and service charge cost-sharing.

Implied Obligations

Where a lease is silent on repair obligations, certain duties may be implied by common law or statute.

Landlord's Implied Obligations

At common law, landlords generally have limited implied repair obligations. Historically, lessors of furnished dwellings must deliver premises fit for habitation at the start. Landlords also owe obligations in respect of common parts under their control; if those are unsafe, liability can arise without notice.

The most significant implied obligations arise under statute, primarily the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985.

Key Term: Implied Covenant
A term deemed to be part of a lease agreement by law (either common law or statute), even if not expressly written into the document.

Section 11 LTA 1985: This section implies a covenant by the landlord into leases of dwelling houses granted for a term of less than seven years (and certain periodic tenancies). The landlord must:

• Keep in repair the structure and exterior of the dwelling-house (including drains, gutters and external pipes).
• Keep in repair and proper working order the installations in the dwelling-house for the supply of water, gas and electricity and for sanitation (including basins, sinks, baths and sanitary conveniences, but not other fixtures, fittings and appliances for making use of the supply of water, gas or electricity).
• Keep in repair and proper working order the installations in the dwelling-house for space heating and heating water.

These obligations cannot be excluded by the lease terms. Landlord liability ordinarily arises when they have notice of the defect (O’Brien v Robinson [1973]), although if the disrepair is in common parts under the landlord’s control, actual notice may not be required. The Supreme Court in Edwards v Kumarasamy [2016] clarified the scope: s.11 applies to the structure and exterior of the dwelling-house itself; areas not forming part of the dwelling-house (such as a path outside a block) will not be covered unless they are part of the demised premises or the landlord covenant extends to them.

Key Term: Fitness for Human Habitation (s.9A LTA 1985)
An implied covenant (inserted by the Homes (Fitness for Human Habitation) Act 2018) in most residential tenancies in England of less than seven years that the dwelling is fit for human habitation at the commencement and throughout the term. It addresses hazards beyond “repair,” such as damp, ventilation, lighting, and safety, and cannot be contracted out.

The s.9A covenant complements s.11: issues such as pervasive damp or inadequate ventilation that may not amount to “disrepair” can still breach the fitness covenant. Tenants may claim damages or seek orders requiring remedial works.

Tenant's Implied Obligations

At common law, tenants have an implied duty to use the property in a 'tenant-like manner' (Warren v Keen [1953]). This involves carrying out minor day-to-day maintenance (e.g., changing fuses, unblocking sinks) and not causing damage (committing waste). Tenants are generally not impliedly responsible for major structural repairs or for remedying fair wear and tear unless the lease explicitly requires it. A failure to report damage promptly can itself be a breach, particularly if the lease contains an express requirement to notify the landlord of disrepair. In multi-occupied buildings, undertenants should notify the head tenant and the head landlord where appropriate so that structural or common parts disrepair can be addressed.

Key Term: Tenant-like manner
The common law standard requiring a tenant to take proper care of the premises and perform minor maintenance tasks a reasonable occupier would do, while avoiding wilful or negligent damage and addressing issues caused by them or their visitors.

Full Repairing and Insuring (FRI) Leases

In commercial property, particularly leases of whole buildings, it is common to encounter Full Repairing and Insuring (FRI) leases.

Key Term: FRI Lease
A lease, typically commercial, where the tenant takes responsibility for all repairs (both internal and external/structural) and for insuring the property, or reimbursing the landlord's insurance costs.

FRI leases aim to provide the landlord with a 'clear rent', meaning the rental income is received without deductions for property outgoings like repairs or insurance. The tenant effectively bears the full cost of maintaining the property throughout the term. Even in leases of part, tenants often bear a proportionate cost of repairing the structure and common parts via a service charge, making the effect similar to an FRI obligation.

In negotiating FRI terms, tenants should ensure exclusions for insured risks and fair wear and tear, and consider a schedule of condition to cap obligations if the building is old or in poor repair at grant. Where the landlord insures, rent suspension should apply if insured damage renders premises unfit, and reinstatement obligations should be clearly allocated (commonly to the landlord) with timeframes. Both parties must avoid acts that vitiate the insurance, and landlords often include non-vitiation clauses and control over insurance procurement and claims.

Worked Example 1.1

A tenant occupies a shop under a 5-year commercial lease granted in 2022. The lease contains a tenant covenant 'to keep the premises in good repair' but is silent on structural repairs. A major crack appears in an external wall due to subsidence. Who is responsible for the repair?

Answer:
The tenant is likely responsible. The covenant 'to keep in repair' includes putting into repair. While generally interpreted in light of the property's condition at commencement, significant disrepair may still fall under this obligation. As it's a commercial lease, s.11 LTA 1985 does not apply. The tenant should check if subsidence is an insured risk excluded from their liability under the insurance clauses. If not, the tenant is likely liable for the structural repair under this express covenant.

Standard of Repair

The required standard of repair is often a point of contention. The leading case, Proudfoot v Hart (1890), established that the standard depends on the "age, character, and locality" of the property. It does not require the tenant to provide the landlord with a fundamentally different property from the one demised. The property should be kept so that it is reasonably fit for occupation by a reasonably-minded tenant of the class likely to take it.

This means:

• An old property does not need to be modernised.
• Repairs should be appropriate for the property's character (e.g., using suitable materials).
• The standard required is that which would make the property reasonably fit for occupation by a reasonably-minded tenant of the class likely to take it.

A covenant 'to keep in good condition' may impose a higher standard than simply 'to repair', potentially requiring work even without disrepair if the condition is poor.

The line between “repair” and “renewal” is important. The classic test (Lurcott v Wakely & Wheeler [1911]) distinguishes repair (restoration by renewal of subsidiary parts) from renewal (reconstruction of substantially the whole), which would exceed a repair covenant unless the clause expressly requires renewal. Pre-existing defects can fall within repair obligations where their effects cause deterioration that is remediable without replacing substantially the whole element (Ravenseft v Davstone). Conversely, some defects are design issues rather than disrepair; condensation due to inadequate design is not “disrepair” per se (Quick v Taff-Ely BC [1986]), though it may engage the fitness covenant under s.9A LTA 1985 in residential tenancies.

Drafting and practical management can help avoid disputes. Tenants should:

• Seek exclusions for fair wear and tear and pre-existing defects.
• Limit obligations with a schedule of condition.
• Clarify that damage caused by insured risks is carved out, with reinstatement under insurance.
• Avoid clauses requiring compliance “to the satisfaction of the landlord’s surveyor” without a reasonableness constraint.

Landlords often reserve rights of entry to inspect and to carry out works (including self-help), and include obligations on tenants to notify disrepair promptly. In multi-occupied buildings, service charge regimes should specify whether tenants fund only repairs or also renewals and improvements, as improvements can significantly expand costs.

Worked Example 1.2

A commercial lease granted for 10 years in 2018 contains a tenant covenant to repair the interior and a landlord covenant to repair the structure. The roof (part of the structure) is leaking, causing damage to the tenant's stock. The tenant has notified the landlord, who has failed to act. What remedy should the tenant pursue?

Answer:
The tenant should consider suing the landlord for damages to recover the cost of the damaged stock and potentially losses from business interruption. The tenant could also seek an order for specific performance to compel the landlord to repair the roof, as this is a structural issue falling under the landlord's covenant. Using self-help (set-off) is risky in commercial leases unless expressly permitted and the procedure is complex.

Worked Example 1.3

A tenant holds a 12-month assured shorthold tenancy of a flat. The boiler fails in mid-winter, leaving no heating or hot water. The tenant emails the landlord immediately. The lease is silent on repair. What obligations arise and what steps should be taken?

Answer:
s.11 LTA 1985 implies a non-excludable covenant requiring the landlord to keep installations for space heating and heating water in repair and proper working order. Once notified, the landlord must act within a reasonable time. If the landlord fails, the tenant may claim damages for discomfort and losses and may seek specific performance. Additionally, the s.9A fitness covenant requires the dwelling to be fit for human habitation; lack of heating can breach fitness. The tenant should preserve evidence, allow access for inspection/repair, and consider contacting local authority environmental health if hazards persist.

Worked Example 1.4

A tenant underlets the first-floor unit of a multi-occupied building. The underlease places the undertenant on full repairing terms for the interior only. The building’s main soil stack (structure/common part) fails and sewage backs up into the undertenant’s unit. Who is responsible and how are costs allocated?

Answer:
Structural/common parts repairs are the head landlord’s responsibility under the headlease/service charge regime. The undertenant’s interior repairing covenant should not extend to the structural soil stack. The undertenant must notify the underlandlord (head tenant) promptly; the head tenant should inform the head landlord. The cost will typically be recovered via service charge from tenants according to the lease. The undertenant may claim damages from the head landlord or head tenant if failure to repair after notice caused loss, depending on covenants in the underlease and notice timing.

Worked Example 1.5

At lease end, a landlord alleges extensive dilapidations and claims £150,000 for repairs. The tenant argues the building will be redeveloped and the works would be valueless. How are damages assessed?

Answer:
s.18(1) LTA 1927 caps damages to the diminution in value of the reversion caused by the breach. If the landlord intends (and is reasonably certain) to demolish or alter the premises such that the repairs would be valueless, damages may be nil. The landlord must prove loss; a dilapidations claim cannot exceed the reversionary loss even if repair costs are higher. Evidence of redevelopment plans and scope will be important.

Remedies for Breach of Repair Covenant

If a party fails to comply with their repairing obligations, the other party has several potential remedies.

Landlord's Remedies for Tenant's Breach

Damages, specific performance, forfeiture, and self-help are available routes, subject to statutory constraints.

Damages: The landlord can sue the tenant for damages for breach of covenant. However, s.18(1) LTA 1927 imposes significant limitations:

• Damages are capped at the diminution (reduction) in the value of the landlord's reversion caused by the breach. This may be less than the cost of the repairs.
• No damages are recoverable if the premises are to be demolished or structurally altered at the end of the term in a way that renders the repairs valueless.

The Leasehold Property (Repairs) Act 1938 may also apply (for leases granted for 7+ years with 3+ years remaining), requiring the landlord to follow a special procedure before claiming damages or seeking specific performance. If the Act applies and the landlord wants to sue for damages for repairs, notice must be served on the tenant. The tenant has 28 days to serve a counter-notice; if they do, the landlord needs the court’s leave to proceed. The court considers whether the proposed works are reasonable, whether the tenant will have time to enjoy the benefit, and other equitable factors. This regime is designed to protect tenants from oppressive enforcement for extensive repairs near the end of long terms.

Specific Performance: An order compelling the tenant to carry out the repairs. This is an equitable remedy granted at the court's discretion and is rare, particularly as it requires ongoing supervision. It is more likely where damages are inadequate and forfeiture is inappropriate. In Rainbow Estates Ltd v Tokenhold Ltd [1999], the court granted specific performance due to absence of forfeiture/self-help, progressive deterioration, and the inadequacy of damages, with no improper motive.

Forfeiture: The landlord may seek to terminate the lease prematurely. This typically requires an express forfeiture clause. For breach of a repair covenant, the landlord must first serve a notice under s.146 LPA 1925, specifying the breach, requiring remedy (if possible) within a reasonable time, and claiming compensation if desired. If the Leasehold Property (Repairs) Act 1938 applies, the s.146 notice must inform the tenant of their right to serve a counter-notice; if served, the landlord needs court leave to proceed. The tenant can apply for relief from forfeiture, and courts commonly grant relief upon undertaking to remedy the breach and paying costs.

Self-Help (Jervis v Harris Clause): Many modern leases include a clause allowing the landlord to enter, carry out repairs if the tenant defaults after notice, and recover the cost from the tenant as a debt.

Key Term: Jervis v Harris Clause
A lease clause allowing the landlord to enter the premises to carry out repairs that are the tenant's responsibility (usually after giving the tenant notice and a chance to remedy) and then recover the costs from the tenant as a debt, avoiding the limitations on damages under s.18 LTA 1927.

This is often the most effective remedy for landlords. Recovery as a debt sidesteps s.18 damages limits and the Leasehold Property (Repairs) Act 1938 constraints. Strict compliance with notice and scope is essential; works must fall within the tenant’s covenant, and costs must be reasonably incurred. Excessive or improvement works beyond the covenant risk challenge.

In addition, landlords may rely on covenants requiring tenants to notify disrepair. Failure to do so can itself be a breach, enabling recovery of additional losses caused by delay.

Tenant's Remedies for Landlord's Breach

Tenants can seek:

Damages: The tenant can sue the landlord for damages for losses resulting from the disrepair (e.g., damage to belongings, lost profits, discomfort). Statutory duties under s.11 LTA 1985 and s.9A LTA 1985 provide clear bases for liability in residential dwellings, subject to notice and access rights. In commercial leases, landlords may have express structural repair obligations.

Specific Performance: The court may order the landlord to perform repair obligations, especially where damages are inadequate (e.g., persistent failure affecting habitability). Courts are more willing to grant specific performance against landlords than tenants, particularly in residential contexts where the property is unusable.

Self-Help (Set-off): A tenant may, in certain circumstances, carry out the repairs themselves and deduct the reasonable cost from future rent payments. This right exists at common law but requires the tenant to follow a strict procedure: notify the landlord of the disrepair, give the landlord a reasonable time to act, warn the landlord of the intention to do the work and deduct the cost, obtain estimates, carry out the work, and provide receipts to the landlord. This carries risks if the procedure is not followed correctly or if the cost is deemed unreasonable. Case law recognises limited rights of set-off for necessary repairs (often referenced to Lee-Parker v Izzett [1971]), but commercial leases frequently exclude or limit set-off rights expressly.

Where common parts are under landlord control and disrepair affects safety, tenants may also involve local authority enforcement (housing standards or environmental health) in residential contexts.

Revision Tip

Always check the date the lease was granted and its term. Statutory obligations (like s.11 LTA 1985 and s.9A LTA 1985) and restrictions on remedies (like the Leasehold Property (Repairs) Act 1938) often depend on these factors. In commercial leases, scrutinise the insurance and service charge clauses alongside repair covenants; they frequently determine who pays and how reinstatement occurs.

Additional Practical Considerations

Negotiating the clause: Tenants should resist “put into repair” and “good condition,” prefer “maintain,” and anchor obligations to a schedule of condition where the property is aged or dilapidated. Exclusions for fair wear and tear, pre-existing defects, historic contamination, and damage caused by insured risks are key. Repair obligations should not be drafted to require compliance “to the satisfaction of the landlord’s surveyor” without adding “acting reasonably,” and dispute resolution provisions can be included for disagreements about scope or standard.

Extent of premises: In a lease of whole, tenants commonly assume responsibility for structure and exterior (including landlord’s fixtures, such as boilers and heating systems). In a lease of part, tenants usually repair only the interior, with contribution via service charge for structure, exterior, and common parts. Even so, undertenants should be aware that service charge regimes can fund improvements and renewals, not just repairs, which can become expensive near the end of the term.

Insurance and rent suspension: Where insured damage occurs (e.g., fire), leases commonly provide that rent is suspended (in whole or in part) until reinstatement. If the landlord insures, reinstatement duties typically fall on the landlord, and the tenant is protected by rent suspension and possibly a break right if reinstatement is not completed within a long-stop period. If the tenant insures, reinstatement obligations may fall on the tenant instead, but commercial leasing practice in England and Wales often places the insurance burden on the landlord, recharging the premium to tenants.

Occupiers’ liability: If the landlord retains occupation of common parts, they owe duties to lawful visitors under the Occupiers’ Liability Act 1957. Tenants should check indemnity provisions and confirm that the landlord maintains common parts properly to avoid safety issues and potential claims.

Service charge governance: Tenants are obliged to pay only for matters agreed in the lease. Check the list of obligatory services (repairs, cleaning, lighting common parts, lift maintenance, grounds maintenance) and discretionary services (security, entry systems). Renewal and replacement of plant and equipment and energy efficiency upgrades must be scrutinised, as they can be high-cost “improvements” that are not necessarily “repairs.” Clauses establishing reserve or sinking funds are common in multi-occupied buildings.

Yield up and terminal dilapidations: At term end, tenants must yield up in the condition required by the lease. Dilapidations claims are assessed with s.18 LTA 1927 limits. Where redevelopment is planned, tenants should seek evidence to demonstrate that alleged repairs would be valueless or that the diminution in value is lower than repair costs. Pre-action conduct follows industry protocols, but the statutory cap governs final assessment.

Key Point Checklist

This article has covered the following key knowledge points:

• Repair obligations arise from express lease covenants, implied common law duties, and statutory provisions (notably s.11 LTA 1985 and s.9A LTA 1985 for short residential leases).
• The standard of repair depends on the property's age, character, and location (Proudfoot v Hart), and the distinction between repair and renewal (Lurcott v Wakely & Wheeler) informs what works fall within a repair covenant.
• A covenant 'to keep in repair' includes an obligation to put into repair if necessary, which may require improvement or renewal of subsidiary parts (Ravenseft v Davstone).
• Full Repairing and Insuring (FRI) leases place the primary burden of repairs and insurance on the commercial tenant; leases of part often pass structural/common parts costs via service charge.
• Negotiation points include excluding fair wear and tear, pre-existing defects, and insured risks; using schedules of condition; and moderating “good condition” and “put into repair” wording.
• Remedies for tenant's breach include damages (limited by s.18 LTA 1927), specific performance (rare but possible), forfeiture (requires s.146 notice), and self-help via a Jervis v Harris clause (recovering costs as debt).
• The Leasehold Property (Repairs) Act 1938 can restrict enforcement on long leases with more than three years unexpired; court leave may be required after a tenant counter-notice.
• Remedies for landlord's breach include damages, specific performance, and potentially self-help/set-off against rent (requires strict procedure and often excluded in commercial leases).
• In residential leases, landlord obligations under s.11 LTA 1985 require repairs to structure/exterior and installations; notice is generally required, and Edwards v Kumarasamy clarifies scope; s.9A fitness extends beyond disrepair.
• Underleases must align with headlease obligations; repair allocations in multi-occupied buildings commonly rely on service charges, and undertenants should give prompt notice of structural/common parts disrepair.

Key Terms and Concepts

• Repair Covenant
• Implied Covenant
• FRI Lease
• Jervis v Harris Clause
• Tenant-like manner
• Schedule of Condition
• Insured Risk
• Fitness for Human Habitation (s.9A LTA 1985)