56 N.J. 130, 146, 265 A.2d 526, 535 (1970)
In April 1969, Joseph Marini as landlord and Alice Ireland as tenant entered into a one-year lease for an apartment located in a two-family duplex building at 503-B Rand Street, Camden, New Jersey.1
The annual rent of $1,140 was agreed to be paid in monthly installments of $95.2 The lease incorporated a covenant of quiet enjoyment but did not include a specific covenant for repairs.3
On or about June 25, 1969, the tenant discovered that the toilet in the leased apartment was cracked and water was leaking onto the bathroom floor.4 After repeated unsuccessful attempts to inform the landlord of this condition, on or about June 27, 1969, she hired registered plumber Karl T. Bittner who repaired the toilet at a cost of $85.72 which the tenant paid.5
On July 15, 1969, the tenant mailed the landlord a check for $9.28 together with the receipt for $85.72 in payment of the July rent.6 The landlord challenged the offsetting of the repair cost.7 He demanded the outstanding $85.72.8
When his demands were refused, the landlord instituted a summary dispossess action for nonpayment of rent in the Camden County District Court alleging the nonpayment of the July rent in the amount of $85.72 and August rent of $95.9 A hearing was held on August 15, 1969.10
The judge conceived the issue as entirely a legal one and determined that the facts which the tenant alleged did not create a duty upon the landlord to make repairs.11 Without trying out the issues tendered by the tenant, he found a default in payment of rent and rendered a judgment for possession.12 The tenant appealed to the Appellate Division.13
On August 29, 1969, a judge of the Appellate Division granted a temporary stay of the judgment for possession and the warrant of eviction.14 The Appellate Division granted a stay pending appeal on September 23, 1969 and ordered the tenant to pay all the rents then due except the contested July rent.15 Before the Appellate Division heard argument, the Supreme Court certified the case on its own motion.16
Whether defendant’s claimed right to offset her cost of repairs against rent raised a jurisdictional issue?17
Under N.J.S.A. 2A:18-53(b) jurisdiction in a summary dispossess action exists only upon a default in the payment of rent.18 N.J.S.A. 2A:18-59 limits appeal to the question of jurisdiction.19 The jurisdictional inquiry encompasses whether rent is due and owing.20 A tenant’s equitable defense asserting that an offset relieves the duty to pay in whole or part directly implicates jurisdiction rather than presenting a mere merits defense.21
Yes. The tenant mailed a check for $9.28 together with the $85.72 repair receipt in payment of July rent.22 The landlord refused the offset and sued for the unpaid balance plus August rent.23 The County District Court entered judgment for possession without considering the defense.24 Because jurisdiction turns on the existence of a rent default, the tenant’s offset claim that no rent was owing necessarily raised the jurisdictional issue.25
Defendant’s claimed right to offset her cost of repairs against rent raised a jurisdictional issue.26
Whether the landlord had a duty to repair and whether the issue of failure to comply with such duty may be raised in a dispossess action?27
A residential lease contains an implied covenant that the premises are habitable and fit for living at the inception of the term and will remain so during the entire term.28 The landlord must maintain vital facilities in usable condition.29 Breach of this covenant may be raised as an equitable defense in a dispossess action because the court must consider any legal or equitable defense asserting absolution from payment in whole or part.30
Yes. The lease described the premises as a four-room-and-bath apartment restricted to dwelling use.31 The toilet constituted a vital facility whose failure rendered the premises uninhabitable.32 The tenant’s offset defense directly challenged whether rent remained owing.33 The landlord’s duty to repair and the tenant’s right to raise that duty in the dispossess proceeding were properly before the court.34
The landlord had a duty to repair and the issue of failure to comply with such duty may be raised in a dispossess action.35
Whether the tenant had the right to make repairs upon the landlord’s failure to do so and the right to offset the cost thereof against rent?36
When a landlord fails to make repairs to vital facilities necessary to maintain the premises in livable condition after timely notice, the tenant may cause the repairs to be made and deduct the reasonable cost from future rent.37 The tenant is not required to vacate.38 The tenant may elect self-help and offset as an alternative to constructive eviction.39
Yes. After unsuccessful attempts to notify the landlord of the cracked leaking toilet, the tenant hired a registered plumber who repaired the facility at a cost of $85.72 and offset that sum against the July rent.40 This satisfied the conditions for self-help and offset under the implied covenant of habitability.41
The tenant had the right to make repairs upon the landlord’s failure to do so and the right to offset the cost thereof against rent.42