|
The Defective Premises Act 1972 (c. 35) is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom that covers landlords' and builders' liability for poorly constructed and poorly maintained buildings, along with any injuries that may result. During the 19th century, the common law principle that a landlord could not be liable for letting a poorly maintained house was established, while a long-running principle was that, in practice, builders could not be sued for constructing defective buildings. The courts began to turn against the first principle during the 20th century, imposing several restrictions on the landlord's immunity, but the landlord was still largely free from being sued. The Defective Premises Bill was introduced to the House of Commons as a private member's bill by Ivor Richard on 1 December 1971, and given the Royal Assent on 29 June 1972, coming into force as the Defective Premises Act 1972 on 1 January 1974. The Act establishes a duty of care builders and their sub-contractors owe to the occupiers of property they construct or modify, and also establishes a duty of care landlords hold towards their tenants and any third parties who might be injured by their failure to maintain or repair property. The Act received a mixed reaction from critics; while some complimented it on its simple nature compared to the previously complex common rule laws, others felt that it was too limited for what was desired to be achieved, and that the wording used was at times both too vague and too specific. ==Background== Prior to the passing of the Act, builders who constructed defective buildings could not, practically, be sued under tort.〔Elliott (2007) p.38〕 At the same time, a landlord who let a dilapidated or defective house could not be sued for injuries suffered by non-tenants, something based first on the "Privity of Tort" principle that was overturned in ''Donoghue v Stevenson'' () AC 562 (that if A had a contract with B and in the process injured C, C was prevented from suing A because of the contract with B) and the decision in ''Robbins v Jones'' () 15 CB (ns) 221, where Chief Justice Earl said that "a landlord who lets a house in a dangerous state is not liable for accidents happening during the term; for, fraud apart, there is no law against letting a tumbledown house". This immunity was further extended in later cases.〔Spencer (1975) p.49〕 The courts began to turn against this position in the 20th century; the case of ''Cunard v Antifyre'' () 1 KB 551 established that a landlord could be liable if the source of an injury emanated from property of which he was in possession, even if the injury happened on land he no longer owned or occupied. In ''Dutton v Bognor Regis Urban District Council'' () 1 QB 373, the courts arguably abolished the immunity of the landlord completely.〔Spencer (1975) p.50〕 By 1974, this immunity excluded situations where the danger came from premises that the landlord occupied and where the landlord actively created a danger, and only included the landlord, not associated people.〔Spencer (1975) p.54〕 The Defective Premises Bill was introduced to the House of Commons as a private member's bill by Ivor Richard on 1 December 1971,〔(【引用サイトリンク】title=DEFECTIVE PREMISES BILL (Hansard, 1 December 1971) )〕 and was not debated at all in the Commons, something the academic lawyer Peter North called "remarkable". There was some debate in the House of Lords, with questions and amendments covering Section 1, but the bill was not substantially amended, something North puts down to the quality of the draft prepared by the Law Commission.〔North (1973) p.628〕 The Act was given the Royal Assent on 29 June 1972, and came into force on 1 January 1974.〔(【引用サイトリンク】title=ROYAL ASSENT (Hansard, 29 June 1972) )〕 抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』 ■ウィキペディアで「Defective Premises Act 1972」の詳細全文を読む スポンサード リンク
|