FACULTY OF SOCIAL SCIENCES

DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT

HRM 234: BUSINESS LAW

MRS MUZVONDIWA

QUESTION

Discuss five remedies to a tenant who occupies a property which is not properly maintained
by the landlord (20 marks)
NAME SURNAME REG NUMBER MODE OF ENTRY LEVEL

JOHN. D MANDAWE R2113616X CONVENTIONAL 1.2

TINASHE.B DANDURE R216288T CONVENTIONAL 1.2

KELI ZANO R217350E CONVENTIONAL 1.2

KENNETH CHIKWEKWE R218071G CONVENTIONAL 1.2

KUDZAI MUNGATE R2110080W CONVENTIONAL 1.2

GRACE.N MUNYARADZI R2113747 CONVENTIONAL 1.2

DORCAS BHOBHO R2113310J CONVENTIONAL 1.2

THELMA. T BHASERA R2113399P CONVENTIONAL 1.2

MASCELYN. T CHITEREKA R2118508V CONVENTIONAL 1.2

SHARMAINE SAUNGWEME R217781M CONVENTIONAL 1.2

PANASHE. T ZHOU R2111429F CONVENTIONAL 1.2

SEAN. T MTIMA R217673B CONVENTIONAL 1.2

TSITSI CHITONGO R2116537J CONVENTIONAL 1.2

FADZAI. C NGWARAI R219775T CONVENTIONAL 1.2

PRIMROSE. M MANAKU R217579N CONVENTIONAL 1.2

LAWRENCIA MASHAPA R199702C CONVENTIONAL 1.2

When a property owner agrees to rent the property to others, a landlord-tenant relationship is
created. This relationship is governed by the terms of the lease agreed to between the parties, as
well as state and common law obligations which apply to all leases. Over and above the terms of
the lease, the law also implies a warranty from landlord to tenant which guarantees that the
premises will remain habitable throughout the tenancy. This implied warranty of habitability is
materially breached when defects left unrepaired by the landlord affect the health and safety of
the tenant, such as inadequate plumbing, heat, or water supply.

In the common law, the obligations of each party to a lease were considered to be independent
covenants. This meant that the failure of one party to fulfill his or her obligations did not excuse
the other party from their obligations. So, even if a landlord delivered a property with defects in
breach of his duty, this would not suffice to allow the tenant to terminate the lease and stop
paying rent.  Unless the tenant could demonstrate that the defects amounted to a constructive
eviction from the property which forced him to abandon the premises, a tenant’s only remedy
would be to sue the landlord for damages, while continuing to pay rent.

Today, however, the law generally views a lease as creating dependent covenants. So, a

landlord’s violation of his duties, including breach of the warranty of habitability, may release
the tenant from his own responsibilities under the lease, without the expense of a lawsuit. As
such, a tenant whose rights under the lease have been violated may unilaterally terminate the
agreement, though the law grants the tenant alternative remedies should he prefer to remain in
the rental property despite the landlord’s breach.

Monetary Damages

If a tenant terminates a lease or chooses to continue to inhabit a rental property despite

conditions which constitute a breach of the warranty of habitability, the tenant may collect
damages for harms associated with the breach. If the tenant relocates to another dwelling, such
damages include reasonable relocation costs, plus the difference in rent between the property
vacated and the new property the tenant has moved to. Any other expenditure by the tenant
which stem from the defective condition of the property may likewise be recoverable as
damages.
Courts have also recognized that tenants living in a dwelling with defects substantial enough to
breach the warranty of habitability often suffer a high degree of discomfort and annoyance. As
such, some courts have ruled that these tenants may sue to recover damages for emotional
distress, over and above the other damages suffered.

Retaliatory Eviction

An important avenue of redress open to tenants who face materially defective conditions on their
leased property is the reporting of such violations of state or municipal housing codes to the
authorities responsible for enforcing these codes. Landlords who want to avoid the consequences
of housing code violations may try to discourage such reporting by seeking to evict tenants who
make such reports, or to not renew their leases. This practice frustrates the legislative purpose
behind housing code laws, and so the law has developed protections for tenants in such
situations.

If a tenant who has previously reported housing code violations faces eviction by a landlord and
can show that the motive behind the eviction was retaliation for reporting the violations, the
tenant can claim a defense of retaliatory eviction. The defense may extend to cases in which a
landlord refuses to renew a lease in retaliation for a tenant’s reporting of violation, even when
the landlord would be fully within her rights not to renew the lease for any reason she chooses.

For example, a tenant who enjoys a month to month lease normally may face non-renewal of a
lease after thirty days notice and eviction proceedings if the tenant remains on the premises
thereafter. Under normal circumstances, the landlord can choose not to renew and subsequently
to evict for any reason. However, if the tenant can show the reason was retaliatory; this may
serve as a defense against eviction.

Retaliatory eviction can also serve as a defense against retaliation by means of a rent increase. If
a landlord raises a tenant’s rent in response to the tenant reporting housing code violations, and
then seeks to evict the tenant for failing to pay the increased rent, the tenant can defend against
eviction by demonstrating the retaliatory nature of the landlord’s actions.

Note that a tenant who has failed to meet his rent obligations may not raise retaliatory eviction as
a defense against eviction. However, if the withholding of rent was legal, such as when the
conditions of the rental property materially deprived the tenant of full use of the property, then
the tenant may assert retaliatory eviction as a defense against a landlord seeking to evict

Termination

If the landlord breaches his duties, one option available to the tenant is to terminate the
agreement. Should the tenant choose termination, she may stop paying rent, and vacate the
property within a reasonable period of time. Generally, to terminate a lease on the grounds of a
breach, the tenant must serve written notice on the landlord, specify the conditions that represent
material noncompliance, demand the correction of the conditions within a specified period of
time and inform the landlord of the date that the lease will terminate if the conditions are not
corrected.

At that point, if the conditions are not remedied, the tenant’s obligation to pay rent ceases, and
the tenant must leave the property. It’s important to note that terminating the lease does not bar
the tenant from seeking damages for harms caused by the landlord’s breach.

Rent Reduction

Another remedy available to a tenant in case of landlord non-compliance with lease obligations
is complete or partial rent abatement. This option may be useful for those who are not in a
position to find new rental property, and for those who would prefer to temporarily relocate until
the defects in the property are remedied without terminating the lease. Unless the tenant is
entirely deprived of use of the property, defective conditions do not usually permit the tenant to
withhold rent completely. Generally, rent abates to the extent the tenant is deprived of the full
normal use of the premises.

Some courts have permitted reductions based on the fair market rental value of the premises.
This means that the rent is reduced from the contract amount to the market value of the property
as is, with the existing defects.

The law generally requires that the tenant inform the landlord and give a reasonable amount of
time to allow for repairs before reducing rent payments. Alternatively, in some jurisdictions, if
the landlord fails to repair the defective conditions after reasonable notice, the tenant may
dedicate a portion of the owed rent to make the repairs on her own. The tenant continues to
reside on the rental premises, and deducts the amount used for repairs from future rent payments.

The amount used to conduct repairs must be reasonable. Some states fix the maximum allowable
expenditures on repairs to be deducted at a sum total of one month’s rent. A landlord may
respond to a decision to withhold rent by initiating eviction proceedings. If a court determines
that the rent was improperly withheld, or that too high an amount was withheld, the tenant may
be forced to pay the withheld rent and may face eviction.

A number of means are available to protect the tenant who opts to reduce rental payments rather
than terminate the lease and does not wish to face possible eviction for unilateral withholding of
rent. A tenant may place the amount of rent withheld in escrow, to demonstrate to the court that
the money is available to be paid upon remedy of the defects.

At the governmental level, many states and cities have enacted ordinances establishing
procedures for pursuing rent reduction. These may include the right of tenants to apply for rent
reduction with governmental agencies, or a mechanism for paying rent to the city or state
directly, with the money held in abatement until the landlord repairs the defective conditions.

Finally, a tenant may simply pay the full rent amount despite the defects and sue the landlord for
return of rent paid in excess of the value of the rental property in its present condition. This way,
the tenant does not risk eviction by being in default of his rental obligations.
REFERENCE LIST