CA 1 February 2001. Claimants S held a shorthold tenancy of premises owned by first defendant H. H installed a gas fire to replace a defective model shortly before granting the tenancy, but did not enter into a related service agreement. S was taken to hospital, diagnosed with carbon monoxide poisoning. S issued proceedings against H alleging breach of his obligations to keep the fire in repair as implied in the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 s11, and breach of duty of care under the Defective Premises Act 1972 s4. At the trial it was found that S's poisoning was caused by carbon monoxide emissions from the fire and defects would have been obvious on routine servicing, but H was not liable as he was unaware of the defect. S appealed. Appeal was allowed on the basis of H's obligation of duty of care as defined in the Defective Premises Act 1972 s4, but the trial judge's assessment that the S was 80% contributory negligent for not bringing the defect to H's attention was upheld.