000			01626cam a2200253 4500
001			ABS64010
008			000000n2001 000 0 eng u
035			_a(Sirsi) u112818
245			_aSykes v Harry and another
260			_c2001
490			_aEstates Gazette _v[2001] 17 EG 221-227(7)
520			_aCA 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.
590			_aABS
650			_aDEFECTIVE PREMISES ACT 1972
650			_aLANDLORD AND TENANT ACT 1985
650			_aDUTY OF CARE
650			_aDEFECTS
650			_aGAS FIRES
650			_aPOISONING
650			_aLIABILITY
650			_aSYKES V HARRY
690			_aLANDLORD AND TENANT-CASE LAW
942			_n0
999			_c67163 _d67163