Neil Todd v. Myles Clapperton and another [2009] CSOH 112

Proof:- In this action the pursuer sought damages from the defender, from whom he and his partner rented a property from, after a glass panelled door there swung on to his hand as he entered the living room causing him to be injured. The pursuer based his claim on a breach of the condition implied by Section 113 and paragraph 1(2) of Schedule 10 to the Housing (Scotland) Act 1987 which provides:- "In any contract to which this paragraph applies there shall, notwithstanding any stipulation to the contrary, be implied a condition that the house is at the commencement of the tenancy, and an undertaking that the house will be kept by the landlord during the tenancy, in all respects reasonably fit for human habitation." The parties agreed the value of the claim at £25,000. The main issue at proof was whether or not the pursuer was a credible and reliable witness and whether he had proved that the accident had happened in the manner averred on record. There were a number of matters the court considered in relation to the credibility of the pursuer, in particular, the medical records which contained the history provided by the pursuer on his admission to the hospital in relation to how he came by his injuries. The court also considered the questions:- (1) whether it been proved that the property was not reasonably fit for human habitation? (2) would a reasonable inspection carried out by the defenders have discovered the defect in the pane? and (3) were the defenders in breach of their obligations to put the house in a condition such that it was in all respects reasonably fit for human habitation regardless of whether an inspection of the subjects would have revealed the defect in the pane?