Anon: 1564

Waste in a marsh was alleged, in that the lessee had allowed a sea wall adjoining the marsh to become ruinous, as a result of which the sea had caused damage to the land. Counsel submitted that the allegation was not good, because the overflowing of the sea could not make waste, since the sea could not be controlled. Dyer, J. said that it seemed reasonable that if there were a small breach in the wall which the lessee did not repair, but allowed it to continue, so that after the violence the sea broke the whole wall and surrounded the land, that was waste, because it could have been avoided by thelessee at the beginning. But if it occurred suddenly, that could be pleaded in bar of the accusation. But he said that it would be a rare case and asked the clerks whether they had any precedents of such an allegation: and they answered no.
Dyer J
Trin 6 Eliz (1564), Moore (KB) 62 no. 173 Waste, 72 ER 442
England and Wales
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 . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 09 May 2021; Ref: scu.196744