A tenant repeatedly complained to his landlord about cigarette smoke drifting into his apartment from the apartment below him. Despite attempts by the landlord to remedy the situation, the problem continued and the tenant filed an application with the court to put his rent in an escrow account. The trial court ordered the landlord to remedy the problem within 21 days and to refund 50% of the tenant’s rent for a one-year period ($3,834) because of the tenant’s inability to use his master bedroom and closet due to the smoke. The court of appeal agreed with the lower court and affirmed the decision, finding that sufficient evidence was provided to show that the landlord failed to keep the apartment in a fit and habitable condition.
Some jurisdictions allow an individual or organization to initiate an action against another private party who is not following a particular law. For example, a person may sue a restaurant that allows smoking despite a smoke free law. If the plaintiff is claiming the violation of the law caused physical harm, this may also be a personal injury case.
An individual or organization may seek civil damages against a tobacco company based on the claim that the use of tobacco products causes disease or death. Some of these cases will relate to general tobacco products, while others will relate to specific subcategories of tobacco products--for example, light or low products, menthol or other flavored products. Additionally, there may be cases relating to exposure to secondhand smoke.
A claim for violating a law protecting tenants or home owners, such as the covenant of quiet enjoyment, the warranty of habitability, constructive eviction, or trespass. For example, a tenant could sue a neighbor or the property owner when exposed to drifting secondhand smoke in their home.
The court might consider procedural matters without touching the merits of the case. These might include: improper joinder, when third parties, such as Health NGOs or government officials, seek to become parties to the suit; lack of standing, where a plaintiff fails to meet the minimum requirements to bring suit; lack of personal jurisdiction, where the court does not have jurisdiction to rule over the defendant; or lack of subject matter jurisdiction, where the court does not have jurisdiction over the issue at suit.
A tenant repeatedly complained to his landlord about cigarette smoke drifting into his apartment from the apartment below him. Despite attempts by the landlord to remedy the situation, the problem continued and the tenant filed an application with the court to put his rent in an escrow account. The trial court ordered the landlord to remedy the problem within 21 days and to refund 50% of the tenant’s rent for a one-year period ($3,834) because of the tenant’s inability to use his master bedroom and closet due to the smoke. The court of appeal agreed with the lower court and affirmed the decision, finding that sufficient evidence was provided to show that the landlord failed to keep the apartment in a fit and habitable condition.