000			01426cab a2200193 4500
001			ABS38217
008			090401t1987 xxu||||| |||| 00| 0 eng d
035			_a(Sirsi) u9283
041			_aeng
245			_aHawkins v Dhawan and another
260			_c1987
350			_a0
490			_aEstates Gazette _v283(6352) 19 September 1987, 1388-1391(2)
520			_aCA 3 February 1987. Appeal by the tenant(H) against dismissal of his claim against the second defendant(M). (The first defendant MS Dharwan(D) was dismissed from the action at the end of the first day). The case concerned liability for penetration of water from a blocked basin in M`s flat on the first floor, through the ceiling to H`s flat below. H sued both D and M. The claim against M was based solely on negligence . The judge at the trial concluded the claim for negligence had not been substantiated, and M was not under a duty to make regular checks. H appealed. The CA rejected criticisms of the judge`s conclusion on liability the action having begun on a res ipsa loquitur basis which is inappropriate when the act is brought against two different defendants, disputing as to who was in control. An occupier is not under any duty regularly to inspect an overflow pipe he had no reason to expect might be blocked. Appeal dismissed.
650			_aRYLANDS V FLETCHER
690			_aPROPERTY LAW AND PRACTICE-CASE LAW
942			_n0
948			_c04/03/1997
999			_c5772 _d5772