Read also: DIRECT LIABILITY OF SUBLESSOR TO LESSOR
-
The lessor warrants that he has a right to lease the thing, that the lessee shall enjoy the legal and peaceful possession of the thing, and that the thing is fit for the use for which it is intended and free from any hidden fault or defect.
-
In case of eviction of the lessee, and the return of the rents paid is required, a reduction shall be made taking into account the period during, which the lessee enjoyed the thing.
-
The lessor is liable for the warranty of the thing leased against any hidden defects, this liability for warranty of the thing leased does not amount to an obligation to indemnify the tenant for damages.
Because of the leaks in the roof of the storeroom of a rented building, without fault or negligence on the part of the lessee, some of his merchandise stored in said storeroom was damaged. In such case, does the lessee have recourse against lessor for defects on the rented property?
Yes.
The law says:
In a lease contract, the lessor warrants that he has a right to lease the thing, that the lessee shall enjoy the legal and peaceful possession of the thing, and that the thing is fit for the use for which it is intended and free from any hidden fault or defect.
In case of eviction of the lessee, and the return of the rents paid is required, a reduction shall be made taking into account the period during, which the lessee enjoyed the thing. The lessee has also the right to ask for the proportionate reduction of the rents agreed upon where the area or number of the object of the lease is less than that stated in the contract.
In connection with a lease, warranty is the obligation to repair or correct any fault or defect existing when the lessee took over the property leased, but when the law declares that the lessor must warrant the thing leased; it is not to be understood that he must also indemnify the lessee.
Liability for the warranty is not equivalent to liability in damages, as the latter is an obligation distinct from the former.
The lessor’s obligation to warrant the thing leased, whether or not he knew of the existence therein of defects that rendered it unsuitable for the use for which the lessee intended it, is distinct from his liability for damages, which only attaches when he knew about such defects and failed to reveal them to the lessee or concealed them, in which case fraud and bad faith may be presumed on his part. (Yap Kim Chuan vs. Alfonso M. Tiaoqui, G.R. No. 10006, September 18, 1915).
The lessor is liable for the warranty of the thing leased against any hidden defects this liability for warranty of the thing leased does not amount to an obligation to indemnify the tenant for damages, which is only to be allowed when there is proof that the lessor acted with fraud and in bad faith by concealing to the lessee. Hence, while the lessor is obligated by the general rule to warranty of the thing leased, whether or not he may know of the existence therein of defects that render it inadequate for the use the tenant intends, he is only liable for an indemnity for damages in addition to the warranty when he knew of the defects in the thing leased and had not revealed them to the lessee, a procedure which induces the presumption that he acted with fraud and in bad faith.
Alburo Alburo and Associates Law Offices specializes in business law and labor law consulting. For inquiries, you may reach us at info@alburolaw.com, or dial us at (02)7745-4391/0917-5772207.
All rights reserved.
SUBSCRIBE NOW FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES!
[email-subscribers-form id=”4″]