CA 19 November 1987. In early 1984 the plaintiff (M) was a council tenant but he spent little time in the property due to illness in the family. On 15 January there was a fire during which the fire brigade had to break down the door of the flat, effectively ruining the door and frame leaving the flat insecure. The council`s emergency repairs consisted of sheeting made of thin plywood sealed by nails. On returning to the flat M removed the sheeting to check the flat`s contents which were at that time still intact and left, replacing the sheeting in secure fashion. He phoned the council to request repair but the next weekend found this had not been done and the flat had been burgled. The door was replaced with thick sheeting, denying M access until a proper repair was done on 5 February. M issued proceedings against the council claiming that it was an implied term of the tenancy that the council should maintain the flat. The court however stated that the council could not be held respo