Someone recently bought our

students are currently browsing our notes.


Hughes v Metropolitan Rly

[1877] 2 App Cas 439

Case summary last updated at 02/01/2020 12:50 by the Oxbridge Notes in-house law team.

Judgement for the case Hughes v Metropolitan Rly

 P was a lessee of property that D served a repair notice which had to be complied with within a time limit or P would face ejection. P offered to sell the property to D and negotiations continued for several months. Eventually they broke off, the repairs having been neglected and P was ejected. HL ruled that ongoing negotiations had the effect of suspending a notice to repair property i.e. the time limit within which to repair the property was effective from the point that negotiations ceased. Lord Cairns: it would be inequitable not to suspend the repairs since a party who thought that they might sell the remainder of the lease would obviously not undertake repairs. There was an implied promise in the correspondence that the repairs notice would be delayed, and therefore it had to be ruled that the repairs notice was delayed during negotiations. 

Hughes v Metropolitan Rly crops up in following areas of law