Landlords’ repairing obligations under tenancy agreements.

On 14 October 2026, the Registrar of the Supreme Court of Gibraltar handed down judgment in the Patricia Henderson v S Brady & Others (2026/MISC/028) proceedings (the “Judgment”). The Judgment dismissed the counterclaim brought by the First and Second Defendants (the “Tenants”). It contains a helpful analysis of whether a residential landlord in Gibraltar owes any obligation to repair, given that Gibraltar has no equivalent to section 11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 (England and Wales).

The landlord was represented by Samuel Marrache of Hassans. The Tenants appeared in person.

The Counterclaim

The counterclaim was advanced on two bases: (i) that the landlord was responsible for damage caused by damp and mould which she had allegedly failed to remedy in breach of the tenancy agreement; and (ii) that the landlord was also responsible for noise coming from a nearby school.

Damp and mould – no breach

The Registrar first considered breach of the tenancy agreement, on the assumption (made for that purpose only) that the landlord was obliged to keep the structure and exterior of the building in repair. Applying O’Brien v Robinson [1973] AC 912, he held that such an obligation only arises once the landlord has notice of the need for repair. The landlord is then allowed a reasonable time to put it right. On the facts of this case, the Registrar found that the landlord had acted where she could and usually did so promptly. Further, the Tenants had also failed to prove the cause of the residual damp, the burden being on them to do so.

No repairing obligation under Gibraltar law

Although it was not necessary to decide the point, the Registrar also addressed the Claimant’s principal submission that the landlord owed no repairing obligation at all. The tenancy agreement contained no landlord’s covenant concerning the building’s structure, exterior or fitness for habitation, and at common law no such covenant is implied, as recognised in Goodman v Attorney General [2001-02 Gib LR 77]. The implied covenant that furnished accommodation is fit for occupation is confined to the start of the term.

Importantly, the Registrar distinguished Goodman, where a repairing obligation was implied in the tenancy agreement (applying Barrett v Lounova (1982) Ltd [1990] 1 QB 348) to give effect to the tenant’s covenant to keep the interior “in tenantable repair”. In this case, the tenants’ covenant was to keep the interior “clean and tidy”, which “describes an activity, which the tenants could continue to perform whatever the state of the exterior”.

With no statutory obligation either, the Registrar concluded that the landlord “owed no obligation, express, implied or statutory, to repair the premises or to keep them free from damp”. 

Noise from the school

The claim for breach of the covenant for quiet enjoyment also failed, as the express covenant only extended to interruption by the landlord, her agents or those claiming under her. The school occupies its own land in its own right. The Registrar also found that the Tenants had not proven that the representation had been untrue and dismissed that complaint too. 

Comment

The Judgment contains important practical guidance for residential landlords and tenants in Gibraltar. The first is that, absent an express covenant, a landlord may owe no obligation to repair the structure or exterior of a property. The second is that the Court will not necessarily imply such a covenant (to repair) in the agreement, unless there is a pre-existing obligation on the tenant to keep the interior of the property in tenantable repair (or similar wording). In that case, a Goodman ‘correlative obligation’ may impose a duty on the landlord to repair the exterior of a building, given that without such an obligation, the tenant’s obligation to repair could be frustrated by the landlord. The third is that any repairing obligation is only engaged on notice, and the tenant must prove the cause of any damage claimed. 

Finally, a landlord is not liable under the covenant for quiet enjoyment for noise caused by third parties who do not claim under her. 

The Judgment can be found here: https://www.gcs.gov.gi/uploads/judgments/supremecourt/2026/patricia_henderson_v_steven_brady_ors.pdf#viewer.action=download 

Enquiries: samuel.marrache@hassans.gi

For more insights from our legal experts, please subscribe here.