The Rental Disputes Centre (RDC) ruled that tenant is liable for any damage caused by their negligence while the property is in their possession

Search Insight

ALL INSIGHTS

Our client, the landlord, entered into a tenancy contract with the tenant for the rental of a residential property. As per the contract’s terms, the tenant received the flat in good condition and is responsible for maintaining an insurance policy against all risks, including floods.

FACTS

Unfortunately, three months into the tenancy, the tenant notified our client of an unexpected water leak occurring in the middle of the night, which caused a flood and significant, irreparable damage to the wooden floor. The tenant argued that their insurance policy does not cover floods, and that the incident was beyond their control, thus claiming they are not liable for the damage.

Despite our client’s repeated efforts to clarify that, under the tenancy contract and applicable Dubai Rent Law, the tenant is responsible for maintaining the flat during the rent period and restoring it to its original condition at the end. The tenant has not accepted this responsibility and has instead filed a case before the Rental Disputes Centre (RDC), requesting the appointment of a court expert to evaluate the damage and confirm that it was beyond tenant’s control.

The court expert concluded that the flood occurred during the occupancy of the flat by the tenant, making the tenant responsible for the full repair of the substantially damaged wooden floor.

CASE FILING/PARTIES ARGUMENTS

Tenant claim/arguments:

Despite the court expert’s conclusion, the Tenant proceeded to file a case before RDC seeking the following:

  • Ordering our client to repair the damaged floor; and
  • Compensation for the time they have endured with the damaged floor, which prevented the tenant from fully enjoying the use of the flat.

In support of their claim, the tenant argued that:

  • The incident was beyond their control.
  • According to the tenancy contract, the landlord is responsible for repairing any damage exceeding AED 500.
  • The landlord’s delay in repairing the damaged floor prevented them from fully enjoying the flat, causing material and emotional damage to the family, thus making them entitled to compensation.

Landlord counterclaim/arguments:

On behalf of the landlord, we have filed a counterclaim requesting the RDC to hold the tenant responsible for repairing the damage and restoring the flat to its original condition.

In support of our counterclaim, we argued that:

  • The law mandates the tenant to return the unit in the same condition it was at the time of the taking possession. This includes any repairs necessary to restore the property to its original state if damage occur due to the tenant’s actions or negligence.
  • The flood resulted from the tenant’s negligence in securing or maintaining water sources. It is unreasonable for a significant flood to occur without an initial small leak, suggesting a lack of due diligence on the tenant’s part in identifying and addressing early signs of water leakage.
  • The incident occurred while the flat was under the tenant’s possession, making him liable. As the tenant was in control of the property at the time of the incident, it is his responsibility to ensure that all fixtures and fittings, including water sources, were properly maintained and that any potential risks were mitigated.
  • The tenant failed to secure an appropriate insurance policy as required by the tenancy contract explicitly stating that the insurance should cover all risks, including floods. The tenant’s failure to comply with this condition directly contributed to the inability to cover the damage through the insurance.
  • There was a reasonable expectation that the tenant would take immediate action to mitigate any damage. The delay in addressing the leak and subsequent flood indicates a lack of proactive measures to prevent further damage, thus exacerbating the situation.

RDC RULING

The tenant’s claim was dismissed in its entirety, and the tenant was found liable for repairing all the damage caused by the flood, as required at the time of handing over the premises to our client. The tenant’s subsequent appeal was also unsuccessful, affirming their full liability and responsibility to undertake repairs and restore the property to its original condition, as per the court order and the terms of the tenancy agreement.

OUR OPINION

This case illustrates that the UAE judicial system provides robust protections for landlords. It highlights the necessity for tenants to comprehend their contractual obligations to maintain and preserve the leased premises. Failure to fulfil these obligations can result in significant legal liabilities and the additional burden of legal representation costs and court fees. Tenants must be aware that adherence to the lease terms is imperative to avoid such adverse outcomes and ensure a stable and equitable landlord-tenant relationship.

ABOUT MOTEI

We advise on the full spectrum of the real estate transactions involving sale and purchase of property, off plan projects, mortgaging, transfer of ownership, and landlord and tenant relationships. Our real estate litigators have handled a wide variety of disputes involving sale and purchase agreements, delayed handover, cancelled projects, and discrepancies in saleable area and rental disputes. For info about our Real Estate Practice, please visit: https://motei.com/real-estate/

×