Smith v Marrable (1843)

In this case the courts recognised an exception to the caveat emptor rule, which is a common law rule meaning ‘let the buyer beware’. In the absence of any express agreement betweent the parties, neither party is responsible for the condition of the property, or repairs. Under this principle, the onus is on the person entering into a tenancy to satisfy himself of the condition of the property to which the tenancy relates.
A landlord  rented out furnished premises to Sir Thomas Marrable. Lady Marrable subsequently found the premises to be infested with bugs and Sir Thomas gave notice to the landlord that he was giving up the tenancy.  The landlord argued that Sir Thomas had no right to give up this tenancy because it had been agreed for a minimum term of 5 weeks and only five days had elapsed.

HELD: Lord Abinger CB, directed the jury that "in point of law, every house must be taken to be let upon the implied condition that there was nothing about it so noxious as to render it uninhabitable."
However, the landlord had impliedly promised that the premises would be fit for habitation at the commencement of the tenancy, because the agreement was for a furnished letting. The exception to caveat emptor was justified on the basis that a prospective tenant of furnished premises did not have unimpeded freedom to inspect those premises to see the nature and quality of everything that he was getting. As the rule in Smith v Marrable is a rule of common law, not a statutory provision, it is therefore possible to exclude it altogether by means of an express term in the tenancy agreement.
Since the introduction of fitness standards in the 1950s, the caveat emptor rule has been largely replaced by statute which protects the occupier against the worst conditions and risks.

 

Citation: Smith v Marrable (1843) 152 ER 693