12 H.4.5: 1410

(Year Books) The abbot of Sherborne brought a writ of waste against two husbands and their wives and when the grand distress was returned one husband and wife defaulted and the other husband and wife appeared.
Skrene . . if I lease buildings for a term of years and they are unroofed by a sudden accident I will have no action of waste for that.
HULL, J. What you say is not law because although initially it will not be adjudged waste committed by him but by act of God if he allows the building to remain without a roof and so the timber is damaged he is answerable for that waste because that is his default and by law he is obliged to roof the building.
Skrene. If the whole building is blown down by a sudden wind I am not obliged to rebuild it.
HULL, J. I concede that but where the timbers are standing, which are the substance of the building, and decay for lack of roofing, that is obviously waste.
Hull J. (sitting with Thirning, C.J. and Hankford, J.) thus expressed the view (to which there was no reported dissent) arguendo that a tenant for years is liable if through his default he fails to keep the building in repair.

Citations:

[1410] [Co. Litt. 53a (g)]

Cited by:

CitedDayani v London Borough of Bromley TCC 25-Nov-1999
LA Tenant liable for permissive waste
The local authority was tenant of properties which it sub-licensed to homeless persons for three years was liable for having allowed the properties to deteriorate. It was claimed that they were liable for permissive waste as tenants for a fixed . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Landlord and Tenant

Updated: 16 May 2022; Ref: scu.196735