ABSTRACT
Liverpool City Council v Irwin [1977] AC 239, p 252 Lord Wilberforce: I consider first the appellants’ claim insofar as it is based on contract. The first step must be to ascertain what the contract is. This may look elementary, even naive, but it seems to me to be the essential step and to involve, from the start, an approach different, if simpler, from that taken by the members of the Court of Appeal. We look first at documentary material. As is common with council lettings there is no formal demise or lease or tenancy agreement. There is a document headed ‘Liverpool Corporation, Liverpool City Housing Department’ and described as ‘Conditions of Tenancy’. This contains a list of obligations on the tenant – he shall do this, he shall not do that, or he shall not do that without the corporation’s consent. This is an
amalgam of obligations added to from time to time, no doubt, to meet complaints, emerging situations, or problems as they appear to the council’s officers. In particular there have been added special provisions relating to multi-storey flats which are supposed to make the conditions suitable to such dwellings. We may note under ‘Further special notes’ some obligations not to obstruct staircases and passages, and not to permit children under 10 to operate any lifts. I mention these as a recognition of the existence and relevance of these facilities. At the end there is a form for signature by the tenant stating that he accepts the tenancy. On the landlords’ side, there is nothing, no signature, no demise, no covenant; the contract takes effect as soon as the tenants sign the form and are let into possession.
