Never mind quantum — what about liability?

Abstract

Dilapidations cases in recent years have tended to focus upon damages rather than liability. But many of those cases also illustrate confusion regarding the tests to be applied in order to ascertain whether the covenantor is liable in the first place. Too often professionals adopt a case-technician approach to liability, trying to find the nearest fit to the facts. This approach is unprincipled, and apt to lead to error. This paper seeks to set out the first principles of interpretation of repairing obligations, and to explain why the facts of even closely similar cases may generate quite different liability results.