header-logo header-logo

11 September 2026
Issue: 8176 / Categories: Legal News , Landlord&tenant , Property , Housing , Health & safety
printer mail-detail

NLJ this week: A wider test for unsafe homes

258565
© Getty images
A High Court decision has clarified that a home may be unfit for human habitation not only where conditions endanger health or safety, but also where they seriously undermine comfort and convenience

Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Sukhninder Panesar, head of law at Buckinghamshire New University, examines Harvey v Heaver. The case concerned a rented home affected by damp and mould, severe cold, damaged asbestos ceilings, rodent infestation and a defective septic tank. It is the first authoritative ruling on the amended fitness-for-human-habitation provisions in the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985.

The court drew on private-law, public-law, statutory-nuisance and defective-premises principles, concluding that ‘fitness has two distinct components’. The decision distinguishes the repair duty under s 11 from the broader fitness obligation under s 9A. Tenants can seek both damages and specific performance, while landlords face a high evidential hurdle if alleging that occupiers’ lifestyles caused the defects.

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley adds competition litigator Elaine Whiteford in London

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys welcomes Claudina D’Costa as Director of Client Development Marketing

DWF—11 appointments

DWF—11 appointments

DWF strengthens North West teams with 11 newly qualified solicitors

NEWS
The 25th Pro Bono Week begins today until 6 November, with events hosted by law firms, chambers, law schools and charities across the UK
Pro bono is celebrating a silver anniversary, with initiatives putting businesses and students at the heart of access to justice
Choosing the wrong expert can cost a clinical negligence claimant more than their case
Judges risk weakening their own independence by staying silent over government reforms, a leading public lawyer argues
A discount on damages does not automatically mean an equivalent haircut for legal costs in military deafness claims
back-to-top-scroll