Valid Reason?

Once upon a time, an expat and his wife rented a house in a prime village in Makati. They had a newborn infant live with them.

After a few months, the tenant reached out to the owner and said they wished to pre-terminate the lease. They cited various reasons that pointed to "inhabitable" conditions for the pre-termination. They claimed that smoke from a nearby highway and dust from anearby construction site were causing allergies for their newborn.

They said the noise from supercars roaring on Sunday mornings would wake them up and was a severe nuisance.

They paid 12 months in advance, so they demanded to get their payment back.

If you were the lessor, how would you handle this predicament?

Were the expat's reasons for inhabitable conditions enough to pre-terminate the contract?

If you presented the problem to lawyers, their first question would be, what does your contract say?

I've seen hundreds of lease contracts, and not a single one mentions air quality and noise pollution as valid reasons for pre-termination of the lease. It's likely because having such a clause would put the lessor at a considerable disadvantage since he does not have control over these two factors.

If the lessee insists on having these provisions, at the very least, parties should dictate how these two factors should be substantiated (e.g., decibels, air quality index from city government).

What about when Taal erupted in 2020?

A special case occurred in 2020 when Taal volcano erupted. During this period, air quality in the Metro worsened considerably, so much so that N95 masks were sold out in all establishments. Is this a valid reason for pre-termination? Again, we ask: what does the contract say?

If the contract is silent about this, then it is not a valid claim. Of course, I expect tenants to react violently to this. They would comment on how that's unfair, etc. If this happens, don't take the bait and entertain their comments. Just say, "Let's follow what's on the contract." Directly replying to the tenant's claims is just opening a can of worms.

If the tenant insisted that he was wronged, then he could choose to take the lessor to court–which 99.9% of the time doesn't happen because of the monetary and mental anguish that goes with it. Of course, the lessor could be more understanding and try to meet the tenant halfway.

Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer, and these are merely my views.