ECC 104/69

This case involved the eviction of a tenant who had sub-let a property without informing the landlord and the new tenant had damaged the property and caused noise pollution. It was wrongly argued the right to evict had been lost as the landlord had known of the sub-let for a long time. This was not the case as they had not agreed to the property being sub-let.

Background

A property owner filed a case before the Court of First Instance against two lessees requesting the vacation of a property because the first lessee, without informing the lessor, had leased the property to another lessee who used it as a plumbers which disturbed the neighbours because of noise and damaged the property.

The second lessee filed a case against the first lessee requesting the confirmation of the sub lease agreement because they had refused to issue a contract between them. The first lessee filed a case and requested the rejection of the claim.