000			02166cam a2200301 4500
001			ABS67087
008			030930n2003 000 0 eng u
035			_a(Sirsi) u123766
245			_aMuscat v Smith
260			_c2003
490			_aEstates Gazette _v[2003] 40 EG 148-155(8)
490			_aEstates Gazette _v[2003] 30 EG 144 (CS)(1)
520			_a[2003] EWCA Civil 962, 10 July 2003. Appellant (M), a statutory tenant, had withheld rent because of lengthy, disruptive remedial work undertaken by the respondent landlord's (S) predecessor in title. On purchasing the freehold, S commenced possession proceedings against M because of rent arrears. M claimed an equitable set-off in respect of the arrears. The judge held that S was only liable to M for damages after purchasing the freehold and that M had no right of set-off against S for breaches of covenant by S's predecessor and had invalidated any possible right of set-off because of his delay in asserting it. As M could not pay off his arrears, a possession order was reasonable. M appealed. "Held" appeal allowed. The reasoning that, since the tenant had endured years of disrepair under the predecessor landlord without taking legal action, it would be unfair to allow his claim against the present landlord, was untenable. M did have an equitable set-off against the rent arrears that S had inherited. If M intended to rely on equitable set-off, he should await a claim for arrears and plead his damage in answer to it. The claim and counterclaim would be remitted to the County Court. View judgment at www.bailii.org.
590			_aABS
650			_aEQUITABLE SET-OFF
650			_aREMEDIAL WORK
650			_aDISREPAIR
650			_aLOTTERYKING LTD V AMEC PROPERTIES LTD
650			_aLAW OF PROPERTY ACT 1925 S142
650			_aLAW OF PROPERTY ACT 1925 S141
650			_aSET-OFF
650			_aRENT ACT 1977 S98(1)
650			_aRENT ACT 1977 SCHED 15 CASE 1
650			_aSMITH V MUSCAT
690			_aLANDLORD AND TENANT-RESIDENTIAL TENANCIES-CASE LAW
856			_uhttps://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2003/962.html _zView judgment on the BAILII website...
942			_n0
999			_c73494 _d73494